Waste Management
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
CLH vs WM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Waste Management
CLH vs WM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Waste Management | Waste Management |
| Market Cap | $15.35B | $88.94B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $6.06B | $25.41B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $395M | $2.79B |
| Gross Margin | 30.0% | 32.1% |
| Operating Margin | 11.2% | 18.5% |
| Forward P/E | 34.1x | 26.9x |
| Total Debt | $3.45B | $22.91B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $826M | $201M |
CLH vs WM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH) | 100 | 484.9 | +384.9% |
| Waste Management, I… (WM) | 100 | 206.6 | +106.6% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: CLH vs WM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
CLH is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and sleep-well-at-night.
- 5.1% 10Y total return vs WM's 302.8%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.70, current ratio 2.33x
- PEG 1.39 vs WM's 1.96
WM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 24 yrs, beta -0.17, yield 1.5%
- Rev growth 14.2%, EPS growth -1.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.6%
- 14.2% revenue growth vs CLH's 2.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 14.2% revenue growth vs CLH's 2.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (26.9x vs 34.1x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 11.0% margin vs CLH's 6.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Lower D/E ratio (125.6% vs 229.3%) | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield; 24-year raise streak; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +29.7% vs WM's -4.3% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.1% ROA vs CLH's 5.2%, ROIC 10.7% vs 9.8% |
CLH vs WM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
CLH vs WM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WM leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WM is the larger business by revenue, generating $25.4B annually — 4.2x CLH's $6.1B. Profitability is closely matched — net margins range from 11.0% (WM) to 6.5% (CLH).
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $6.1B | $25.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $1.1B | $7.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $395M | $2.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $467M | $3.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +30.0% | +32.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +11.2% | +18.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +6.5% | +11.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +7.7% | +12.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +1.9% | +3.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +9.2% | +13.3% |
Valuation Metrics
WM leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 32.9x trailing earnings, WM trades at a 17% valuation discount to CLH's 39.6x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CLH offers better value at 1.61x vs WM's 2.40x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $15.4B | $88.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $18.0B | $111.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 39.56x | 32.91x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 34.13x | 26.94x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 1.61x | 2.40x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 16.01x | 14.95x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 2.55x | 3.53x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 5.60x | 8.92x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 34.75x | 31.59x |
Profitability & Efficiency
WM leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
WM delivers a 28.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $29 in annual profit, vs $14 for CLH. CLH carries lower financial leverage with a 1.26x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WM's 2.29x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), WM scores 7/9 vs CLH's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +14.4% | +28.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.2% | +6.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +9.8% | +10.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +10.6% | +11.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.26x | 2.29x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $2.6B | $22.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $826M | $201M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $3.4B | $22.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 6.34x | 4.89x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CLH leads this category, winning 6 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CLH five years ago would be worth $30,799 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $16,602 for WM. Over the past 12 months, CLH leads with a +29.7% total return vs WM's -4.3%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CLH at 28.2% vs WM's 10.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +18.3% | +1.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +29.7% | -4.3% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +110.6% | +36.0% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +208.0% | +66.0% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +505.3% | +302.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +28.2% | +10.8% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CLH and WM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WM is the less volatile stock with a -0.17 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than CLH's 0.70 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.70x | -0.17x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $316.98 | $248.13 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $201.34 | $194.11 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +90.9% | +88.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 66.7 | 43.0 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 491K | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
WM leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates CLH as "Buy" and WM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 14.7% upside for WM (target: $253) vs 3.9% for CLH (target: $299). WM is the only dividend payer here at 1.50% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $299.33 | $252.86 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 27 | 35 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 24 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $3.30 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.6% | 0.0% |
WM leads in 4 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Valuation Metrics). CLH leads in 1 (Total Returns). 1 tied.
CLH vs WM: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is CLH or WM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the stronger pick with 14. 2% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 4% for Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH). Waste Management, Inc. (WM) offers the better valuation at 32. 9x trailing P/E (26. 9x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH) a "Buy" — based on 27 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.
02Which has the better valuation — CLH or WM?
On trailing P/E, Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the cheapest at 32. 9x versus Clean Harbors, Inc. at 39. 6x. On forward P/E, Waste Management, Inc. is actually cheaper at 26. 9x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Clean Harbors, Inc. wins at 1. 39x versus Waste Management, Inc. 's 1. 96x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — CLH or WM?
Over the past 5 years, Clean Harbors, Inc.
(CLH) delivered a total return of +208. 0%, compared to +66. 0% for Waste Management, Inc. (WM). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CLH returned +505. 3% versus WM's +302. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.
04Which is safer — CLH or WM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 17β versus Clean Harbors, Inc. 's 0. 70β — meaning CLH is approximately -504% more volatile than WM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 126% versus 2% for Waste Management, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — CLH or WM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is pulling ahead at 14. 2% versus 2. 4% for Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Waste Management, Inc. grew EPS -1. 6% year-over-year, compared to -1. 9% for Clean Harbors, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, WM leads at 8. 6% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.
06Which has better profit margins — CLH or WM?
Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the more profitable company, earning 10. 7% net margin versus 6. 5% for Clean Harbors, Inc. — meaning it keeps 10. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WM leads at 18. 3% versus 11. 2% for CLH. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CLH leads at 29. 5%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.
07Is CLH or WM more undervalued right now?
The PEG ratio (forward P/E divided by expected earnings growth rate) is the most precise measure of undervaluation relative to growth potential.
By this metric, Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 1. 39x versus Waste Management, Inc. 's 1. 96x. A PEG below 1. 5 suggests fair-to-attractive pricing relative to expected growth. On forward earnings alone, Waste Management, Inc. (WM) trades at 26. 9x forward P/E versus 34. 1x for Clean Harbors, Inc. — 7. 2x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for WM: 14. 7% to $252. 86.
08Which pays a better dividend — CLH or WM?
In this comparison, WM (1.
5% yield) pays a dividend. CLH does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is CLH or WM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 17), 1. 5% yield, +302. 8% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WM: +302. 8%, CLH: +505. 3%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.
10What are the main differences between CLH and WM?
Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.
WM pays a dividend while CLH does not, making them suitable for different income and tax situations. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform both.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.