Waste Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
MEG vs WM vs RSG vs CLH vs CWST
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Waste Management
Waste Management
Waste Management
Waste Management
MEG vs WM vs RSG vs CLH vs CWST — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Waste Management | Waste Management | Waste Management | Waste Management | Waste Management |
| Market Cap | $631M | $86.87B | $61.80B | $15.52B | $5.35B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $821M | $25.41B | $16.70B | $6.06B | $1.88B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $6M | $2.79B | $2.17B | $395M | $7M |
| Gross Margin | 39.0% | 32.1% | 31.5% | 30.0% | 17.4% |
| Operating Margin | 2.0% | 18.5% | 20.0% | 11.2% | 4.5% |
| Forward P/E | 136.2x | 26.3x | 27.6x | 34.5x | 62.7x |
| Total Debt | $359M | $22.91B | $596M | $3.45B | $1.24B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $11M | $201M | $76M | $826M | $124M |
MEG vs WM vs RSG vs CLH vs CWST — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | Jul 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Montrose Environmen… (MEG) | 100 | 80.2 | -19.8% |
| Waste Management, I… (WM) | 100 | 212.2 | +112.2% |
| Republic Services, … (RSG) | 100 | 239.8 | +139.8% |
| Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH) | 100 | 524.6 | +424.6% |
| Casella Waste Syste… (CWST) | 100 | 143.0 | +43.0% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: MEG vs WM vs RSG vs CLH vs CWST
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
MEG ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure.
- Rev growth 19.3%, EPS growth 93.7%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.1%
- 19.3% revenue growth vs CLH's 2.4%
WM has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in income & stability.
- Dividend streak 24 yrs, beta -0.21, yield 1.5%
- Lower P/E (26.3x vs 62.7x)
- 1.5% yield, 24-year raise streak, vs MEG's 0.7%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
RSG is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if quality and efficiency is your priority.
- 13.0% margin vs CWST's 0.4%
- 6.4% ROA vs CWST's 0.2%, ROIC 13.5% vs 2.6%
CLH is the clearest fit if your priority is long-term compounding and valuation efficiency.
- 5.2% 10Y total return vs CWST's 10.6%
- PEG 1.40 vs WM's 1.91
- Beta 0.64, current ratio 2.33x
- +28.4% vs CWST's -27.9%
CWST is the clearest fit if your priority is sleep-well-at-night.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.33, Low D/E 79.0%, current ratio 1.26x
- Beta 0.33 vs MEG's 1.82, lower leverage
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 19.3% revenue growth vs CLH's 2.4% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (26.3x vs 62.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 13.0% margin vs CWST's 0.4% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs MEG's 1.82, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield, 24-year raise streak, vs MEG's 0.7%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +28.4% vs CWST's -27.9% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.4% ROA vs CWST's 0.2%, ROIC 13.5% vs 2.6% |
MEG vs WM vs RSG vs CLH vs CWST — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
MEG vs WM vs RSG vs CLH vs CWST — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RSG leads in 2 of 6 categories
MEG leads 1 • CLH leads 1 • WM leads 1 • CWST leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RSG leads this category, winning 3 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WM is the larger business by revenue, generating $25.4B annually — 30.9x MEG's $821M. RSG is the more profitable business, keeping 13.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CWST's 0.4%. On growth, CWST holds the edge at +9.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $821M | $25.4B | $16.7B | $6.1B | $1.9B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $67M | $7.7B | $5.3B | $1.1B | $414M |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $6M | $2.8B | $2.2B | $395M | $7M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $72M | $3.3B | $2.6B | $466M | $102M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.0% | +32.1% | +31.5% | +30.0% | +17.4% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +2.0% | +18.5% | +20.0% | +11.2% | +4.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +0.7% | +11.0% | +13.0% | +6.5% | +0.4% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +8.7% | +12.9% | +15.5% | +7.7% | +5.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -5.2% | +3.5% | +2.6% | +1.9% | +9.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +45.3% | +13.3% | +7.6% | +9.2% | -18.6% |
Valuation Metrics
MEG leads this category, winning 4 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 29.2x trailing earnings, RSG trades at a 96% valuation discount to CWST's 712.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), CLH offers better value at 1.62x vs WM's 2.34x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $631M | $86.9B | $61.8B | $15.5B | $5.4B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $979M | $109.6B | $62.3B | $18.1B | $6.5B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -124.64x | 32.14x | 29.20x | 39.99x | 712.00x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 136.22x | 26.29x | 27.60x | 34.47x | 62.70x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 2.34x | 1.64x | 1.62x | — |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 15.41x | 14.67x | 11.87x | 16.16x | 15.74x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.76x | 3.45x | 3.72x | 2.57x | 2.91x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 1.36x | 8.71x | 5.21x | 5.66x | 3.46x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 6.92x | 30.85x | 25.65x | 35.13x | 63.16x |
Profitability & Efficiency
RSG 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 $0 for CWST. RSG carries lower financial leverage with a 0.05x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WM's 2.29x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), RSG scores 8/9 vs CWST's 4/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +1.3% | +28.9% | +18.1% | +14.4% | +0.5% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +0.6% | +6.1% | +6.4% | +5.2% | +0.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +1.3% | +10.7% | +13.5% | +9.8% | +2.6% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +1.5% | +11.7% | +11.3% | +10.6% | +2.9% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 5 | 4 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 0.80x | 2.29x | 0.05x | 1.26x | 0.79x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $348M | $22.7B | $520M | $2.6B | $1.1B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $11M | $201M | $76M | $826M | $124M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $359M | $22.9B | $596M | $3.4B | $1.2B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 4.67x | 4.89x | 8.35x | 6.34x | 1.12x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
CLH leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in CLH five years ago would be worth $31,039 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,170 for MEG. Over the past 12 months, CLH leads with a +28.4% total return vs CWST's -27.9%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CLH at 28.6% vs MEG's -16.8% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -29.9% | -1.0% | -4.2% | +19.6% | -13.4% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -1.4% | -6.2% | -18.8% | +28.4% | -27.9% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -42.5% | +32.9% | +41.8% | +112.9% | -6.3% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -68.3% | +60.4% | +88.0% | +210.4% | +26.6% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -22.1% | +291.1% | +350.5% | +515.7% | +1059.3% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -16.8% | +10.0% | +12.4% | +28.6% | -2.2% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — WM and CLH each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WM is the less volatile stock with a -0.21 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. CLH currently trades 91.9% from its 52-week high vs MEG's 54.5% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.82x | -0.21x | -0.18x | 0.64x | 0.33x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $32.00 | $248.13 | $258.75 | $316.98 | $121.04 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $16.75 | $194.11 | $198.24 | $201.34 | $74.05 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +54.5% | +86.8% | +77.3% | +91.9% | +70.6% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 52.4 | 39.8 | 35.6 | 34.2 | 54.3 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 335K | 1.9M | 1.4M | 516K | 849K |
Analyst Outlook
WM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: MEG as "Buy", WM as "Buy", RSG as "Buy", CLH as "Buy", CWST as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 182.7% upside for MEG (target: $49) vs 2.8% for CLH (target: $299). For income investors, WM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.53% vs MEG's 0.68%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $49.33 | $254.67 | $239.89 | $299.33 | $112.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 12 | 35 | 35 | 28 | 19 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.7% | +1.5% | +1.2% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 0 | 24 | 23 | 0 | 1 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $0.12 | $3.30 | $2.37 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +19.4% | 0.0% | +1.4% | +1.6% | 0.0% |
RSG leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). MEG leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
MEG vs WM vs RSG vs CLH vs CWST: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is MEG or WM or RSG or CLH or CWST 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). Republic Services, Inc. (RSG) offers the better valuation at 29. 2x trailing P/E (27. 6x 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 WM or RSG or CLH or CWST?
On trailing P/E, Republic Services, Inc.
(RSG) is the cheapest at 29. 2x versus Casella Waste Systems, Inc. at 712. 0x. On forward P/E, Waste Management, Inc. is actually cheaper at 26. 3x — notably different from the trailing picture, reflecting expected earnings growth. The PEG ratio (P/E divided by earnings growth rate) is the most growth-adjusted single valuation metric: Clean Harbors, Inc. wins at 1. 40x versus Waste Management, Inc. 's 1. 91x — a reasonable growth-adjusted valuation.
03Which is the better long-term investment — MEG or WM or RSG or CLH or CWST?
Over the past 5 years, Clean Harbors, Inc.
(CLH) delivered a total return of +210. 4%, compared to -68. 3% for Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. (MEG). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CWST returned +1059% versus MEG's -22. 1%. 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 WM or RSG or CLH or CWST?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 21β versus Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. 's 1. 82β — meaning MEG is approximately -975% more volatile than WM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Republic Services, Inc. (RSG) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 5% versus 2% for Waste Management, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — MEG or WM or RSG or CLH or CWST?
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 -47. 8% for Casella Waste Systems, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, CWST leads at 19. 2% 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 WM or RSG or CLH or CWST?
Republic Services, Inc.
(RSG) is the more profitable company, earning 12. 9% net margin versus -0. 1% for Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. — meaning it keeps 12. 9% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RSG leads at 20. 0% versus 1. 5% for MEG. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — RSG leads at 42. 0%, 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 WM or RSG or CLH or CWST 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. 40x versus Waste Management, Inc. 's 1. 91x. 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. 3x forward P/E versus 136. 2x for Montrose Environmental Group, Inc. — 109. 9x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for MEG: 182. 7% to $49. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — MEG or WM or RSG or CLH or CWST?
In this comparison, WM (1.
5% yield), RSG (1. 2% yield), MEG (0. 7% yield) pay a dividend. CLH, CWST do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is MEG or WM or RSG or CLH or CWST better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Republic Services, Inc.
(RSG) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 18), 1. 2% yield, +350. 5% 10Y return). 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 (RSG: +350. 5%, MEG: -22. 1%), 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 WM and RSG and CLH and CWST?
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: MEG is a small-cap high-growth stock; WM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; RSG is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CLH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CWST is a small-cap high-growth stock. MEG, WM, RSG pay a dividend while CLH, CWST 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.