Waste Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MEG vs CLH vs ECVT vs TRC vs PESI
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Waste Management
Chemicals - Specialty
Conglomerates
Waste Management
MEG vs CLH vs ECVT vs TRC vs PESI — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Waste Management | Waste Management | Chemicals - Specialty | Conglomerates | Waste Management |
| Market Cap | $798M | $15.04B | $1.53B | $553M | $207M |
| Revenue (TTM) | $821M | $6.06B | $819M | $50M | $59M |
| Net Income (TTM) | $6M | $395M | $-63M | $73K | $-18M |
| Gross Margin | 39.0% | 30.0% | 22.6% | 12.3% | 4.1% |
| Operating Margin | 2.0% | 11.2% | 15.4% | -16.0% | -26.3% |
| Forward P/E | 172.3x | 33.4x | 22.9x | 341.3x | — |
| Total Debt | $359M | $3.45B | $431M | $94M | $4M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $11M | $826M | $197M | $10M | $12M |
MEG vs CLH vs ECVT vs TRC vs PESI — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Montrose Environmen… (MEG) | 100 | 101.5 | +1.5% |
| Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH) | 100 | 524.6 | +424.6% |
| Ecovyst Inc. (ECVT) | 100 | 115.6 | +15.6% |
| Tejon Ranch Co. (TRC) | 100 | 136.4 | +36.4% |
| Perma-Fix Environme… (PESI) | 100 | 180.1 | +80.1% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MEG vs CLH vs ECVT vs TRC vs PESI
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MEG has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in growth exposure.
- Rev growth 19.3%, EPS growth 93.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.1%
- 19.3% revenue growth vs CLH's 2.4%
- 0.5% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend
CLH is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if long-term compounding is your priority.
- 496.4% 10Y total return vs PESI's 178.6%
- 6.5% margin vs PESI's -30.1%
- 5.2% ROA vs PESI's -20.2%, ROIC 9.8% vs -21.7%
ECVT ranks third and is worth considering specifically for income & stability.
- Dividend streak 2 yrs, beta 0.90
- Better valuation composite
- +102.7% vs TRC's +18.8%
TRC is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.44, Low D/E 19.2%, current ratio 4.14x
- Beta 0.44, current ratio 4.14x
- Beta 0.44 vs PESI's 1.85
Among these 5 stocks, PESI doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.3% revenue growth vs CLH's 2.4% | |
| Value | Better valuation composite | |
| Quality / Margins | 6.5% margin vs PESI's -30.1% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.44 vs PESI's 1.85 | |
| Dividends | 0.5% yield; the other 4 pay no meaningful dividend | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +102.7% vs TRC's +18.8% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 5.2% ROA vs PESI's -20.2%, ROIC 9.8% vs -21.7% |
MEG vs CLH vs ECVT vs TRC vs PESI — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MEG vs CLH vs ECVT vs TRC vs PESI — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
ECVT leads in 2 of 6 categories
CLH leads 2 • MEG leads 1 • TRC leads 1 • PESI leads 0
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
ECVT leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
CLH is the larger business by revenue, generating $6.1B annually — 122.2x TRC's $50M. CLH is the more profitable business, keeping 6.5% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to PESI's -30.1%. On growth, ECVT holds the edge at +32.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $821M | $6.1B | $819M | $50M | $59M |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $67M | $1.1B | $136M | -$47,000 | -$14M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $6M | $395M | -$63M | $73,000 | -$18M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $72M | $467M | $84M | -$33M | -$14M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.0% | +30.0% | +22.6% | +12.3% | +4.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +2.0% | +11.2% | +15.4% | -16.0% | -26.3% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.7% | +6.5% | -7.7% | +0.1% | -30.1% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.7% | +7.7% | +10.2% | -65.9% | -23.4% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.2% | +1.9% | +32.6% | +17.7% | -20.1% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +45.3% | +9.2% | +2.3% | -65.5% | -110.5% |
Valuation Metrics
MEG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 38.7x trailing earnings, CLH trades at a 99% valuation discount to TRC's 7312.5x P/E. On an enterprise value basis, ECVT's 13.3x EV/EBITDA is more attractive than MEG's 18.0x.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $798M | $15.0B | $1.5B | $553M | $207M |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $1.1B | $17.7B | $1.8B | $637M | $200M |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -157.64x | 38.74x | -22.90x | 7312.50x | -14.89x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 172.29x | 33.43x | 22.87x | 341.25x | — |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.57x | — | — | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 18.04x | 15.73x | 13.28x | — | — |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.96x | 2.49x | 2.11x | 11.15x | 3.36x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.72x | 5.48x | 2.68x | 1.12x | 4.11x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 8.76x | 34.04x | 21.87x | — | — |
Profitability & Efficiency
CLH leads this category, winning 5 of 9 comparable metrics.
Profitability & Efficiency
CLH delivers a 14.4% return on equity — every $100 of shareholder capital generates $14 in annual profit, vs $-34 for PESI. PESI carries lower financial leverage with a 0.09x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to CLH's 1.26x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), ECVT scores 6/9 vs MEG's 4/9, reflecting solid financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +1.3% | +14.4% | -10.2% | +0.0% | -34.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.6% | +5.2% | -4.2% | +0.0% | -20.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.3% | +9.8% | +4.2% | -1.1% | -21.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.5% | +10.6% | +4.6% | -1.3% | -16.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.80x | 1.26x | 0.71x | 0.19x | 0.09x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $348M | $2.6B | $234M | $84M | -$7M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $11M | $826M | $197M | $10M | $12M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $359M | $3.4B | $431M | $94M | $4M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.67x | 6.34x | 2.08x | — | -42.14x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CLH leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CLH five years ago would be worth $29,882 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,853 for MEG. Over the past 12 months, ECVT leads with a +102.7% total return vs TRC's +18.8%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CLH at 27.3% vs MEG's -10.1% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -11.3% | +15.9% | +40.9% | +30.7% | -8.8% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | +46.6% | +26.7% | +102.7% | +18.8% | +26.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -27.2% | +106.2% | +32.9% | +21.5% | +21.7% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -61.5% | +198.8% | +15.4% | +30.2% | +45.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -1.4% | +496.4% | +9.9% | -2.5% | +178.6% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -10.1% | +27.3% | +9.9% | +6.7% | +6.8% |
Risk & Volatility
TRC leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
TRC is the less volatile stock with a 0.44 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than PESI's 1.85 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. TRC currently trades 96.1% from its 52-week high vs PESI's 67.7% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.82x | 0.70x | 0.90x | 0.44x | 1.85x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $32.00 | $316.98 | $14.94 | $21.31 | $16.50 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $14.92 | $201.34 | $6.69 | $15.31 | $8.02 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +69.0% | +89.0% | +93.5% | +96.1% | +67.7% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 46.8 | 37.9 | 66.9 | 55.6 | 41.5 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 332K | 504K | 2.2M | 98K | 164K |
Analyst Outlook
ECVT leads this category, winning 1 of 1 comparable metric.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MEG as "Buy", CLH as "Buy", ECVT as "Buy", TRC as "Buy", PESI as "Hold". Consensus price targets imply 123.5% upside for MEG (target: $49) vs -30.8% for ECVT (target: $10). 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 | Buy | Buy | Hold |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $49.33 | $299.33 | $9.67 | — | $18.00 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 27 | 6 | 1 | 1 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.5% | — | — | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.12 | — | — | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +15.3% | +1.7% | +3.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
ECVT leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Analyst Outlook). CLH leads in 2 (Profitability & Efficiency, Total Returns).
MEG vs CLH vs ECVT vs TRC vs PESI: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MEG or CLH or ECVT or TRC or PESI 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 2. 4% for Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH). Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH) offers the better valuation at 38. 7x trailing P/E (33. 4x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. (MEG) a "Buy" — based on 12 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 — MEG or CLH or ECVT or TRC or PESI?
On trailing P/E, Clean Harbors, Inc.
(CLH) is the cheapest at 38. 7x versus Tejon Ranch Co. at 7312. 5x. On forward P/E, Ecovyst Inc. is actually cheaper at 22. 9x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MEG or CLH or ECVT or TRC or PESI?
Over the past 5 years, Clean Harbors, Inc.
(CLH) delivered a total return of +198. 8%, compared to -61. 5% for Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. (MEG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CLH returned +496. 4% versus TRC's -2. 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 — MEG or CLH or ECVT or TRC or PESI?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Tejon Ranch Co.
(TRC) is the lower-risk stock at 0. 44β versus Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc. 's 1. 85β — meaning PESI is approximately 320% more volatile than TRC relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc. (PESI) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 9% versus 126% for Clean Harbors, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MEG or CLH or ECVT or TRC or PESI?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Montrose Environmental Group, Inc.
(MEG) is pulling ahead at 19. 3% versus 2. 4% for Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. grew EPS 93. 7% year-over-year, compared to -916. 7% for Ecovyst Inc.. 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 — MEG or CLH or ECVT or TRC or PESI?
Clean Harbors, Inc.
(CLH) is the more profitable company, earning 6. 5% net margin versus -22. 3% for Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc. — meaning it keeps 6. 5% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: CLH leads at 11. 2% versus -19. 0% for PESI. 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 MEG or CLH or ECVT or TRC or PESI more undervalued right now?
On forward earnings alone, Ecovyst Inc.
(ECVT) trades at 22. 9x forward P/E versus 341. 3x for Tejon Ranch Co. — 318. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MEG: 123. 5% to $49. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — MEG or CLH or ECVT or TRC or PESI?
In this comparison, MEG (0.
5% yield) pays a dividend. CLH, ECVT, TRC, PESI do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MEG or CLH or ECVT or TRC or PESI better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Clean Harbors, Inc.
(CLH) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 0. 70), +496. 4% 10Y return). Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc. (PESI) carries a higher beta of 1. 85 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (CLH: +496. 4%, PESI: +178. 6%), 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 MEG and CLH and ECVT and TRC and PESI?
These companies operate in different sectors (MEG (Industrials) and CLH (Industrials) and ECVT (Basic Materials) and TRC (Industrials) and PESI (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: MEG is a small-cap high-growth stock; CLH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; ECVT is a small-cap quality compounder stock; TRC is a small-cap high-growth stock; PESI is a small-cap quality compounder stock. MEG pays a dividend while CLH, ECVT, TRC, PESI 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.
Find Stocks Like These
Explore pre-built screens for each stock's profile, or build a custom screen to find stocks that outperform all of them.
You Might Also Compare
Based on how these companies actually compete and overlap — not just which sector they're filed under.