Waste Management
Build Your Comparison
Side-by-side financial analysisStock Comparison
LNZA vs GEVO vs AMTX vs REX vs JPM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Chemicals - Specialty
Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing
Chemicals - Specialty
Banks - Diversified
LNZA vs GEVO vs AMTX vs REX vs JPM — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Waste Management | Chemicals - Specialty | Oil & Gas Refining & Marketing | Chemicals - Specialty | Banks - Diversified |
| Market Cap | $13M | $375M | $134M | $1.44B | $908.57B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $58M | $174M | $209M | $656M | $280.33B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-44M | $-34M | $-74M | $93M | $57.05B |
| Gross Margin | 44.7% | 47.3% | 3.4% | 16.5% | 60.0% |
| Operating Margin | -99.2% | -4.6% | -13.4% | 11.0% | 25.9% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | — | 56.6x | 14.6x |
| Total Debt | $27M | $168M | $318M | $21M | $942.38B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $13M | $1M | $5M | $189M | $343.34B |
LNZA vs GEVO vs AMTX vs REX vs JPM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Sep 21 | Jun 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| LanzaTech Global, I… (LNZA) | 100 | 0.6 | -99.4% |
| Gevo, Inc. (GEVO) | 100 | 23.2 | -76.8% |
| Aemetis, Inc. (AMTX) | 100 | 10.7 | -89.3% |
| REX American Resour… (REX) | 100 | 329.4 | +229.4% |
| JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) | 100 | 198.7 | +98.7% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: LNZA vs GEVO vs AMTX vs REX vs JPM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
LNZA lags the leaders in this set but could rank higher in a more targeted comparison.
GEVO ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 8.5%, EPS growth 58.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 415.1%
- 8.5% revenue growth vs AMTX's -22.3%
Among these 5 stocks, AMTX doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
REX carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for sleep-well-at-night and valuation efficiency.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.23, Low D/E 3.0%, current ratio 5.94x
- PEG 0.75 vs JPM's 0.83
- Beta 0.23, current ratio 5.94x
- Beta 0.23 vs LNZA's 1.79
JPM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability and long-term compounding is your priority.
- Dividend streak 15 yrs, beta 0.87, yield 1.8%
- 481.2% 10Y total return vs REX's 345.5%
- Better valuation composite
- 20.4% margin vs LNZA's -76.1%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 8.5% revenue growth vs AMTX's -22.3% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 20.4% margin vs LNZA's -76.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.23 vs LNZA's 1.79 | |
| Dividends | 1.8% yield; 15-year raise streak; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +77.1% vs LNZA's -77.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 12.1% ROA vs LNZA's -42.2%, ROIC 9.1% vs -190.8% |
LNZA vs GEVO vs AMTX vs REX vs JPM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
LNZA vs GEVO vs AMTX vs REX vs JPM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories
REX leads 2 • LNZA leads 0 • GEVO leads 0 • AMTX leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
JPM is the larger business by revenue, generating $280.3B annually — 4801.7x LNZA's $58M. JPM is the more profitable business, keeping 20.4% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to LNZA's -76.1%. On growth, GEVO holds the edge at +47.5% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $58M | $174M | $209M | $656M | $280.3B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | -$54M | $21M | -$21M | $89M | $81.4B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$44M | -$34M | -$74M | $93M | $57.0B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | -$54M | -$44M | -$21M | $46M | $100.9B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +44.7% | +47.3% | +3.4% | +16.5% | +60.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | -99.2% | -4.6% | -13.4% | +11.0% | +25.9% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -76.1% | -19.4% | -35.4% | +14.1% | +20.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | -91.8% | -25.0% | -10.1% | +7.0% | +36.0% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +26.8% | +47.5% | +27.4% | +3.6% | — |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +35.3% | +2.1% | +29.8% | +119.6% | +16.0% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — GEVO and REX and JPM each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 16.2x trailing earnings, JPM trades at a 8% valuation discount to REX's 17.5x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), REX offers better value at 0.23x vs JPM's 0.92x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $13M | $375M | $134M | $1.4B | $908.6B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $27M | $541M | $447M | $1.3B | $1.51T |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -0.27x | -11.00x | -1.53x | 17.54x | 16.22x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | — | 56.57x | 14.60x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | — | 0.23x | 0.92x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | — | 83.82x | — | 16.40x | 18.52x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.24x | 2.33x | 0.64x | 2.22x | 3.25x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | — | 0.76x | — | 2.07x | 2.51x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | — | — | — | 29.24x | 9.01x |
Profitability & Efficiency
REX leads this category, winning 6 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
JPM delivers a 15.9% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $16 in annual profit, vs $-13 for LNZA. REX carries lower financial leverage with a 0.03x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to JPM's 2.60x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), REX scores 7/9 vs LNZA's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -12.7% | -7.2% | — | +13.7% | +15.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -42.2% | -4.9% | -29.3% | +12.1% | +1.3% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -190.8% | -2.8% | -70.3% | +9.1% | +4.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -73.0% | -3.1% | -19.0% | +8.8% | +8.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 7 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | — | 0.36x | — | 0.03x | 2.60x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $14M | $166M | $313M | -$167M | $599.0B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $13M | $1M | $5M | $189M | $343.3B |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $27M | $168M | $318M | $21M | $942.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | — | -0.66x | -0.35x | — | 0.74x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
REX leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in REX five years ago would be worth $26,813 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $61 for LNZA. Over the past 12 months, REX leads with a +77.1% total return vs LNZA's -77.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors REX at 37.7% vs LNZA's -78.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -57.1% | -25.2% | +23.3% | +35.3% | +0.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -77.7% | +11.6% | -8.4% | +77.1% | +20.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -98.9% | +12.4% | -69.1% | +161.3% | +138.8% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.4% | -80.2% | -86.3% | +168.1% | +135.5% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -99.4% | -99.3% | -18.3% | +345.5% | +481.2% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -78.1% | +4.0% | -32.4% | +37.7% | +33.7% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — REX and JPM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
REX is the less volatile stock with a 0.23 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than LNZA's 1.79 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. JPM currently trades 96.2% from its 52-week high vs LNZA's 8.4% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.79x | 1.52x | 1.09x | 0.23x | 0.87x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $71.19 | $2.97 | $3.80 | $53.36 | $338.09 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $5.02 | $1.12 | $1.30 | $23.82 | $269.72 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +8.4% | +51.9% | +51.6% | +82.2% | +96.2% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 33.2 | 36.4 | 34.7 | 37.7 | 72.1 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 117K | 3.4M | 1.4M | 162K | 7.4M |
Analyst Outlook
JPM leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: LNZA as "Hold", GEVO as "Buy", AMTX as "Buy", REX as "Buy", JPM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 78.6% upside for GEVO (target: $3) vs -10.7% for AMTX (target: $2). JPM is the only dividend payer here at 1.83% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Hold | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $5.50 | $2.75 | $1.75 | $60.00 | $339.75 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 4 | 14 | 7 | 3 | 61 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | — | — | — | +1.8% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 1 | — | — | 0 | 15 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | — | — | — | $5.95 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +2.3% | +3.8% |
JPM leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). REX leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns). 2 tied.
LNZA vs GEVO vs AMTX vs REX vs JPM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is LNZA or GEVO or AMTX or REX or JPM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Gevo, Inc.
(GEVO) is the stronger pick with 849. 3% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -22. 3% for Aemetis, Inc. (AMTX). JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) offers the better valuation at 16. 2x trailing P/E (14. 6x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Gevo, Inc. (GEVO) a "Buy" — based on 14 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 — LNZA or GEVO or AMTX or REX or JPM?
On trailing P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the cheapest at 16. 2x versus REX American Resources Corporation at 17. 5x. On forward P/E, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is actually cheaper at 14. 6x. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: REX American Resources Corporation wins at 0. 75x versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. 's 0. 83x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — LNZA or GEVO or AMTX or REX or JPM?
Over the past 5 years, REX American Resources Corporation (REX) delivered a total return of +168.
1%, compared to -99. 4% for LanzaTech Global, Inc. (LNZA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: JPM returned +481. 2% versus LNZA's -99. 4%. 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 — LNZA or GEVO or AMTX or REX or JPM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), REX American Resources Corporation (REX) is the lower-risk stock at 0.
23β versus LanzaTech Global, Inc. 's 1. 79β — meaning LNZA is approximately 674% more volatile than REX relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, REX American Resources Corporation (REX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 3% versus 3% for JPMorgan Chase & Co. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — LNZA or GEVO or AMTX or REX or JPM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Gevo, Inc.
(GEVO) is pulling ahead at 849. 3% versus -22. 3% for Aemetis, Inc. (AMTX). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: LanzaTech Global, Inc. grew EPS 68. 1% year-over-year, compared to 1. 5% for JPMorgan Chase & Co.. Over a 3-year CAGR, GEVO leads at 415. 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 — LNZA or GEVO or AMTX or REX or JPM?
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the more profitable company, earning 20. 4% net margin versus -87. 7% for LanzaTech Global, Inc. — meaning it keeps 20. 4% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: JPM leads at 26. 0% versus -141. 7% for LNZA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — JPM leads at 59. 9%, 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 LNZA or GEVO or AMTX or REX or JPM 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, REX American Resources Corporation (REX) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 75x versus JPMorgan Chase & Co. 's 0. 83x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) trades at 14. 6x forward P/E versus 56. 6x for REX American Resources Corporation — 42. 0x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for GEVO: 78. 6% to $2. 75.
08Which pays a better dividend — LNZA or GEVO or AMTX or REX or JPM?
In this comparison, JPM (1.
8% yield) pays a dividend. LNZA, GEVO, AMTX, REX do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is LNZA or GEVO or AMTX or REX or JPM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, JPMorgan Chase & Co.
(JPM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 87), 1. 8% yield, +481. 2% 10Y return). LanzaTech Global, Inc. (LNZA) carries a higher beta of 1. 79 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (JPM: +481. 2%, LNZA: -99. 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 LNZA and GEVO and AMTX and REX and JPM?
These companies operate in different sectors (LNZA (Industrials) and GEVO (Basic Materials) and AMTX (Energy) and REX (Basic Materials) and JPM (Financial Services)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: LNZA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; GEVO is a small-cap high-growth stock; AMTX is a small-cap quality compounder stock; REX is a small-cap deep-value stock; JPM is a large-cap deep-value stock. JPM pays a dividend while LNZA, GEVO, AMTX, REX do 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.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.