VOL. XCIV, NO. 247
★ WIDE MOAT STOCKS & COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ★
PRICE: 0 CENTS
Wednesday, December 31, 2025
Enbridge Inc.
ENB · Toronto Stock Exchange
Weighted average of segment moat scores, combining moat strength, durability, confidence, market structure, pricing power, and market share.
Request update
Spot something outdated? Send a quick note and source so we can refresh this profile.
Overview
Enbridge Inc. operates large-scale energy infrastructure across liquids pipelines, natural gas transmission/midstream, regulated gas utilities and storage, and a contracted renewables portfolio. Its moat is primarily structural: irreplaceable corridors and rights-of-way, plus regulated or long-term contracted commercial frameworks (take-or-pay and cost-of-service) that stabilize returns. The gas distribution business adds local franchise protection with regulator-set rates and allowed returns. Key risks are permitting/legal challenges to existing corridors, regulatory resets to allowed returns, and long-run volume pressure from energy transition and electrification.
Primary segment
Liquids Pipelines
Market structure
Oligopoly
Market share
29%-31% (reported)
HHI: —
Coverage
4 segments · 6 tags
Updated 2025-12-31
Segments
Liquids Pipelines
Crude oil & liquids pipeline transportation plus terminals/storage
Revenue
72.8%
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
29%-31% (reported)
Peers
Gas Transmission and Midstream
Natural gas transmission pipelines, gathering/processing and storage
Revenue
11.8%
Structure
Oligopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
19%-21% (reported)
Peers
Gas Distribution and Storage
Regulated natural gas distribution utilities and associated storage in their service territories
Revenue
14.4%
Structure
Monopoly
Pricing
moderate
Share
—
Peers
Renewable Power Generation
Renewable electricity generation (wind/solar/offshore wind) sold into regional power markets via PPAs
Revenue
1%
Structure
Competitive
Pricing
weak
Share
—
Peers
Moat Claims
Liquids Pipelines
Crude oil & liquids pipeline transportation plus terminals/storage
Revenue_share and operating_profit_share are derived from FY2024 segmented operating revenues and segment EBITDA (annual report Note 5), excluding Eliminations and Other. Liquids revenues include large flow-through commodity sales and are not a clean profit proxy.
Permits Rights Of Way
Legal
Permits Rights Of Way
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Cross-border liquid pipelines rely on entrenched easements/rights-of-way; permitting and land access friction makes new competing corridors very hard to build.
Erosion risks
- Adverse court or regulatory outcomes affecting key rights-of-way
- Political opposition delaying renewals/expansions
- High-profile incidents increasing regulatory scrutiny
Leading indicators
- Major permit/court milestones for corridor-critical assets
- Mainline utilization and apportionment rates
- Integrity spending and incident rate trend
Counterarguments
- Incremental capacity from other routes can reduce corridor scarcity
- Energy transition can erode long-run liquids throughput
Physical Network Density
Supply
Physical Network Density
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Large, interconnected liquids network (pipelines + terminals/storage) creates a hard-to-replicate corridor from basins to refineries/export hubs with significant replacement cost.
Erosion risks
- Route-specific demand shifts (basin declines or refinery reconfigurations)
- Regulatory constraints limiting expansions
- Competition from rail/truck in niche markets
Leading indicators
- Throughput vs nameplate capacity by key system
- Capital project backlog and in-service dates
- Utilization changes after competing capacity additions
Counterarguments
- Scale does not guarantee pricing power when tolls are regulated or periodically reset
- Network value depends on matching supply/demand geography over time
Long Term Contracts
Demand
Long Term Contracts
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
A material portion of liquids cash flow is supported by long-term, ship-or-pay style capacity commitments and/or regulated tolling structures, reducing near-term volume sensitivity.
Erosion risks
- Contract roll-offs in weaker basins
- Counterparty credit stress during commodity downturns
- Regulatory/tolling resets reducing allowed returns
Leading indicators
- Contracted capacity % and weighted average contract duration
- Shipper credit rating mix and concentration
- Tolling settlement outcomes and ROE allowances
Counterarguments
- Some assets still face throughput risk where contracts are not fully take-or-pay
- Long contracts mitigate cash-flow volatility but not long-run demand decline
Gas Transmission and Midstream
Natural gas transmission pipelines, gathering/processing and storage
Revenue_share and operating_profit_share are derived from FY2024 segmented operating revenues and segment EBITDA (annual report Note 5), excluding Eliminations and Other.
Regulated Standards Pipe
Legal
Regulated Standards Pipe
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Interstate natural gas transmission rates are regulated; cost-of-service frameworks and tariff structures create stability and raise barriers for new entrants (though they cap upside).
Erosion risks
- FERC policy shifts impacting allowed ROE/cost recovery
- Political and environmental opposition increasing permitting timelines
- Technology/policy-driven demand changes (electrification, fuel switching)
Leading indicators
- FERC rulings and ROE precedent changes
- Contract renewals for major corridors
- LNG export build-out and regional basis differentials
Counterarguments
- Regulation limits true pricing power and can reset economics downward
- Competing pipelines and alternative routes can still pressure utilization
Long Term Contracts
Demand
Long Term Contracts
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Capacity additions and key corridors are frequently secured with long-term take-or-pay style contracts (including LNG-related demand), reducing cash-flow volatility.
Erosion risks
- Contract roll-offs if basin economics weaken
- Counterparty credit deterioration
- Regulatory delays increasing project costs
Leading indicators
- New project sanctioning backed by firm contracts
- Average remaining contract term
- Shipper concentration and credit mix
Counterarguments
- Take-or-pay protects near-term revenue but not long-run demand
- New LNG/industrial projects can be delayed or cancelled
Permits Rights Of Way
Legal
Permits Rights Of Way
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Existing pipeline corridors, compression sites and storage fields are difficult to replicate due to land access, permits and multi-jurisdictional approvals.
Erosion risks
- Permit/timeline risk for expansions
- Community opposition increasing costs
- Policy shifts limiting new gas infrastructure
Leading indicators
- Time-to-permit for major projects
- Expansion in-service slippage vs plan
- Regulatory compliance incidents
Counterarguments
- Brownfield expansions can be blocked even on existing corridors
- Demand can shift away from gas over time in some regions
Gas Distribution and Storage
Regulated natural gas distribution utilities and associated storage in their service territories
Revenue_share and operating_profit_share are derived from FY2024 segmented operating revenues and segment EBITDA (annual report Note 5), excluding Eliminations and Other. Gas distribution revenues include pass-through natural gas costs.
Concession License
Legal
Concession License
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Local distribution utilities typically operate under regulated franchises within defined territories, creating local monopolies with obligation-to-serve and regulated returns.
Erosion risks
- Accelerated electrification reducing long-run gas demand
- Regulatory disallowances or lower allowed ROE
- Policy bans/constraints on new gas hookups in some jurisdictions
Leading indicators
- Customer count growth vs electrification trends
- Rate case outcomes (allowed ROE, cost recovery)
- Local/state/provincial decarbonization mandates
Counterarguments
- Franchise protection can be weakened by policy-driven fuel switching
- Volume risk exists if rate design doesn't fully decouple sales from earnings
Regulated Standards Pipe
Legal
Regulated Standards Pipe
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Distribution rates are set by regulators via cost-of-service and multi-year incentive/price-cap frameworks; this supports predictable cash flows but caps upside.
Erosion risks
- Adverse regulatory outcomes on ROE or cost trackers
- Political pressure to constrain bills
- Capital disallowance for certain programs
Leading indicators
- Approved rate base growth and capex recovery
- Earnings vs allowed ROE and any earnings sharing
- Regulatory lag (timing of rate relief)
Counterarguments
- Regulators can reset allowed returns downward in response to interest rate changes
- Higher-cost decarbonization programs may face pushback
Physical Network Density
Supply
Physical Network Density
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Dense distribution networks are capital-intensive and difficult to duplicate; scale matters for O&M efficiency and reliability programs.
Erosion risks
- Aging infrastructure increasing replacement costs
- Cyber/physical attacks on critical infrastructure
- New safety standards increasing capex
Leading indicators
- Pipeline replacement/integrity program pace
- Leak/incident rate and safety metrics
- O&M per customer and reliability metrics
Counterarguments
- Network size does not prevent demand erosion from electrification
- New customer growth can slow due to housing and permitting constraints
Renewable Power Generation
Renewable electricity generation (wind/solar/offshore wind) sold into regional power markets via PPAs
Revenue_share and operating_profit_share are derived from FY2024 segmented operating revenues and segment EBITDA (annual report Note 5), excluding Eliminations and Other. Segment economics can swing with weather/resource variability.
Long Term Contracts
Demand
Long Term Contracts
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
The renewables portfolio is primarily contracted under long-term fixed-price PPAs, reducing merchant power price exposure and stabilizing cash flows.
Erosion risks
- PPA repricing risk at contract expiry
- Technology cost deflation compressing new-build returns
- Policy/market design changes reducing renewable support
Leading indicators
- Weighted average remaining PPA life
- Capacity factor vs resource forecasts
- Pipeline of permitted/contracted projects
Counterarguments
- PPA auctions are competitive; incumbent advantage is limited
- Returns can be diluted if build costs rise faster than PPA pricing
Capex Knowhow Scale
Supply
Capex Knowhow Scale
Strength
Durability
Confidence
Evidence
Scale, project-execution experience and access to capital can help win and deliver large renewable and offshore wind projects, though advantages are not unique versus large global developers.
Erosion risks
- Supply chain constraints and construction inflation
- Permitting delays (especially offshore wind)
- Rising rates increasing project hurdle costs
Leading indicators
- Project delivery vs budget and schedule
- Financing spreads and partnership structures
- Awarded capacity and contracted backlog
Counterarguments
- Many competitors have comparable scale and access to capital
- Rapid technology shifts can compress any execution advantage
Evidence
operated under easements and rights-of-way
Shows the system operates via third-party easements/rights-of-way (a major barrier and renewal risk).
Company describes an ~18k-mile crude/liquids system and multi-million bpd delivery volumes, supporting scale and corridor density.
supported by long-term take-or-pay contracts
Supports the claim that expansion economics rely on long-duration shipper commitments.
Describes take-or-pay contracting and regulated/cost-of-service tolling as core revenue mechanisms across transportation assets.
We move about 30% of the crude oil produced in North America
Direct company-stated share metric.
Showing 5 of 8 sources.
Risks & Indicators
Erosion risks
- Adverse court or regulatory outcomes affecting key rights-of-way
- Political opposition delaying renewals/expansions
- High-profile incidents increasing regulatory scrutiny
- Route-specific demand shifts (basin declines or refinery reconfigurations)
- Regulatory constraints limiting expansions
- Competition from rail/truck in niche markets
Leading indicators
- Major permit/court milestones for corridor-critical assets
- Mainline utilization and apportionment rates
- Integrity spending and incident rate trend
- Throughput vs nameplate capacity by key system
- Capital project backlog and in-service dates
- Utilization changes after competing capacity additions
Curation & Accuracy
This directory blends AI‑assisted discovery with human curation. Entries are reviewed, edited, and organized with the goal of expanding coverage and sharpening quality over time. Your feedback helps steer improvements (because no single human can capture everything all at once).
Details change. Pricing, features, and availability may be incomplete or out of date. Treat listings as a starting point and verify on the provider’s site before making decisions. If you spot an error or a gap, send a quick note and I’ll adjust.