Oil & Gas Exploration & Production
Compare Stocks
2 / 10Stock Comparison
GFR vs MEG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Waste Management
GFR vs MEG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Industry | Oil & Gas Exploration & Production | Waste Management |
| Market Cap | $410M | $798M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $563M | $821M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-101M | $6M |
| Gross Margin | 22.7% | 39.0% |
| Operating Margin | 10.7% | 2.0% |
| Forward P/E | 16.6x | 172.3x |
| Total Debt | $6M | $359M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $42M | $11M |
GFR vs MEG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 23 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Greenfire Resources… (GFR) | 100 | 114.3 | +14.3% |
| Montrose Environmen… (MEG) | 100 | 71.9 | -28.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: GFR vs MEG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
GFR is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability and sleep-well-at-night.
- Dividend streak 1 yrs, beta 0.05
- Lower volatility, beta 0.05, Low D/E 0.5%, current ratio 1.56x
- Beta 0.05, current ratio 1.56x
MEG carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 19.3%, EPS growth 93.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.1%
- -1.4% 10Y total return vs GFR's -47.5%
- 19.3% revenue growth vs GFR's -27.4%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.3% revenue growth vs GFR's -27.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (16.6x vs 172.3x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 0.7% margin vs GFR's -17.9% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.05 vs MEG's 1.82, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 0.5% yield; the other pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +46.6% vs GFR's +43.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 0.6% ROA vs GFR's -7.8%, ROIC 1.3% vs 3.9% |
GFR vs MEG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
Segment breakdown not available.
GFR vs MEG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 2 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MEG leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
MEG and GFR operate at a comparable scale, with $821M and $563M in trailing revenue. MEG is the more profitable business, keeping 0.7% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to GFR's -17.9%. On growth, MEG holds the edge at -5.2% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $563M | $821M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $144M | $67M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$101M | $6M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$26M | $72M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +22.7% | +39.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +10.7% | +2.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -17.9% | +0.7% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -4.6% | +8.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -20.8% | -5.2% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -3.6% | +45.3% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — GFR and MEG each lead in 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
On an enterprise value basis, GFR's 9.0x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than MEG's 18.0x.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $410M | $798M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $383M | $1.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 12.07x | -157.64x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 16.65x | 172.29x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 8.99x | 18.04x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.97x | 0.96x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.48x | 1.72x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 23.05x | 8.76x |
Profitability & Efficiency
GFR leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
MEG delivers a 1.3% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $1 in annual profit, vs $-10 for GFR. GFR carries lower financial leverage with a 0.01x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to MEG's 0.80x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), GFR scores 5/9 vs MEG's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -10.0% | +1.3% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -7.8% | +0.6% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +3.9% | +1.3% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +5.5% | +1.5% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.01x | 0.80x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | -$36M | $348M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $42M | $11M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $6M | $359M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.48x | 4.67x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
MEG leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in GFR five years ago would be worth $5,246 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,853 for MEG. Over the past 12 months, MEG leads with a +46.6% total return vs GFR's +43.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors MEG at -10.1% vs GFR's -19.4% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | +17.7% | -11.3% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +43.7% | +46.6% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.5% | -27.2% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.5% | -61.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -47.5% | -1.4% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -19.4% | -10.1% |
Risk & Volatility
GFR leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
GFR is the less volatile stock with a 0.05 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than MEG's 1.82 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. GFR currently trades 80.2% from its 52-week high vs MEG's 69.0% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 0.05x | 1.82x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $7.06 | $32.00 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $3.81 | $14.92 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +80.2% | +69.0% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 42.6 | 46.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 239K | 332K |
Analyst Outlook
GFR leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Wall Street rates GFR as "Buy" and MEG as "Buy". MEG is the only dividend payer here at 0.54% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | ||
|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $49.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 1 | 12 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.12 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +15.3% |
GFR leads in 3 of 6 categories (Profitability & Efficiency, Risk & Volatility). MEG leads in 2 (Income & Cash Flow, Total Returns). 1 tied.
GFR vs MEG: Frequently Asked Questions
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is GFR or MEG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Montrose Environmental Group, Inc.
(MEG) is the stronger pick with 19. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -27. 4% for Greenfire Resources Ltd. (GFR). Greenfire Resources Ltd. (GFR) offers the better valuation at 12. 1x trailing P/E (16. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Greenfire Resources Ltd. (GFR) a "Buy" — based on 1 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 — GFR or MEG?
On forward P/E, Greenfire Resources Ltd.
is actually cheaper at 16. 6x.
03Which is the better long-term investment — GFR or MEG?
Over the past 5 years, Greenfire Resources Ltd.
(GFR) delivered a total return of -47. 5%, compared to -61. 5% for Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. (MEG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: MEG returned -1. 4% versus GFR's -47. 5%. 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 — GFR or MEG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Greenfire Resources Ltd.
(GFR) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 05β versus Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. 's 1. 82β — meaning MEG is approximately 3418% more volatile than GFR relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Greenfire Resources Ltd. (GFR) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 1% versus 80% for Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — GFR or MEG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Montrose Environmental Group, Inc.
(MEG) is pulling ahead at 19. 3% versus -27. 4% for Greenfire Resources Ltd. (GFR). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. grew EPS 93. 7% year-over-year, compared to -62. 4% for Greenfire Resources Ltd.. Over a 3-year CAGR, MEG leads at 15. 1% 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 — GFR or MEG?
Greenfire Resources Ltd.
(GFR) is the more profitable company, earning 8. 1% net margin versus -0. 1% for Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 8. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: GFR leads at 10. 1% versus 1. 5% for MEG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — MEG leads at 34. 1%, 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 GFR or MEG more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Greenfire Resources Ltd.
(GFR) trades at 16. 6x forward P/E versus 172. 3x for Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. — 155. 6x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis.
08Which pays a better dividend — GFR or MEG?
In this comparison, MEG (0.
5% yield) pays a dividend. GFR does not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is GFR or MEG better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Greenfire Resources Ltd.
(GFR) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 05)). Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. (MEG) carries a higher beta of 1. 82 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (GFR: -47. 5%, MEG: -1. 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.
10What are the main differences between GFR and MEG?
These companies operate in different sectors (GFR (Energy) and MEG (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: GFR is a small-cap deep-value stock; MEG is a small-cap high-growth stock. MEG pays a dividend while GFR 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.