GFL vs CLH

For growth investors, GFL Environmental Inc.

(GFL) is the stronger pick with 7. 8% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 2. 4% for Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH). GFL Environmental Inc. (GFL) offers the better valuation at 5. 1x trailing P/E (40. 0x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate GFL Environmental Inc. (GFL) a "Buy" — based on 18 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.

On trailing P/E, GFL Environmental Inc.

(GFL) is the cheapest at 5. 1x versus Clean Harbors, Inc. at 38. 7x. On forward P/E, Clean Harbors, Inc. is actually cheaper at 33. 4x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.

Over the past 5 years, Clean Harbors, Inc.

(CLH) delivered a total return of +198. 8%, compared to +14. 9% for GFL Environmental Inc. (GFL). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CLH returned +496. 4% versus GFL's +124. 0%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), GFL Environmental Inc.

(GFL) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 20β versus Clean Harbors, Inc. 's 0. 70β — meaning CLH is approximately 256% more volatile than GFL relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, GFL Environmental Inc. (GFL) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 106% versus 126% for Clean Harbors, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), GFL Environmental Inc.

(GFL) is pulling ahead at 7. 8% versus 2. 4% for Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: GFL Environmental Inc. grew EPS 573. 5% year-over-year, compared to -1. 9% for Clean Harbors, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CLH leads at 5. 3% 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.

GFL Environmental Inc.

(GFL) is the more profitable company, earning 58. 0% net margin versus 6. 5% for Clean Harbors, Inc. — meaning it keeps 58. 0% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CLH leads at 11. 2% versus 5. 2% for GFL. 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.

On forward earnings alone, Clean Harbors, Inc.

(CLH) trades at 33. 4x forward P/E versus 40. 0x for GFL Environmental Inc. — 6. 5x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GFL: 52. 3% to $56. 67.

In this comparison, GFL (0.

2% yield) pays a dividend. CLH does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, GFL Environmental Inc.

(GFL) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 20), +124. 0% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (GFL: +124. 0%, CLH: +496. 4%), 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.

Both stocks operate in the Industrials sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: GFL is a mid-cap deep-value stock; CLH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. 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.