Waste Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
QRHC vs NVRI vs CLH vs CWST vs WM
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Waste Management
Waste Management
Waste Management
Waste Management
QRHC vs NVRI vs CLH vs CWST vs WM — 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 | $24M | $1.59B | $15.52B | $5.35B | $86.87B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $244M | $2.24B | $6.06B | $1.88B | $25.41B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-7M | $-171M | $395M | $7M | $2.79B |
| Gross Margin | 14.8% | 19.2% | 30.0% | 17.4% | 32.1% |
| Operating Margin | 0.8% | 1.0% | 11.2% | 4.5% | 18.5% |
| Forward P/E | — | — | 34.5x | 62.7x | 26.3x |
| Total Debt | $65M | $1.81B | $3.45B | $1.24B | $22.91B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1M | $104M | $826M | $124M | $201M |
QRHC vs NVRI vs CLH vs CWST vs WM — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quest Resource Hold… (QRHC) | 100 | 86.5 | -13.5% |
| Enviri Corporation (NVRI) | 100 | 172.6 | +72.6% |
| Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH) | 100 | 490.2 | +390.2% |
| Casella Waste Syste… (CWST) | 100 | 167.7 | +67.7% |
| Waste Management, I… (WM) | 100 | 201.8 | +101.8% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: QRHC vs NVRI vs CLH vs CWST vs WM
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
Among these 5 stocks, QRHC doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
NVRI ranks third and is worth considering specifically for momentum.
- +171.3% vs QRHC's -52.5%
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
- Lower P/E (34.5x vs 62.7x)
CWST is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if sleep-well-at-night is your priority.
- Lower volatility, beta 0.33, Low D/E 79.0%, current ratio 1.26x
- 18.0% revenue growth vs QRHC's -13.3%
- Beta 0.33 vs QRHC's 1.18, lower leverage
WM carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for income & stability and growth exposure.
- Dividend streak 24 yrs, beta -0.21, yield 1.5%
- Rev growth 14.2%, EPS growth -1.6%, 3Y rev CAGR 8.6%
- 11.0% margin vs NVRI's -7.6%
- 1.5% yield, 24-year raise streak, vs NVRI's 0.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.0% revenue growth vs QRHC's -13.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (34.5x vs 62.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 11.0% margin vs NVRI's -7.6% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs QRHC's 1.18, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield, 24-year raise streak, vs NVRI's 0.0%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +171.3% vs QRHC's -52.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.1% ROA vs NVRI's -6.2%, ROIC 10.7% vs 3.3% |
QRHC vs NVRI vs CLH vs CWST vs WM — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
QRHC vs NVRI vs CLH vs CWST vs WM — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
WM leads in 3 of 6 categories
QRHC leads 1 • CLH leads 1 • NVRI leads 0 • CWST leads 0 • 1 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WM leads this category, winning 4 of 6 comparable metrics.
Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
WM is the larger business by revenue, generating $25.4B annually — 104.4x QRHC's $244M. WM is the more profitable business, keeping 11.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to NVRI's -7.6%. On growth, CWST holds the edge at +9.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $244M | $2.2B | $6.1B | $1.9B | $25.4B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $7M | $204M | $1.1B | $414M | $7.7B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$7M | -$171M | $395M | $7M | $2.8B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $10M | -$40M | $466M | $102M | $3.3B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +14.8% | +19.2% | +30.0% | +17.4% | +32.1% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +0.8% | +1.0% | +11.2% | +4.5% | +18.5% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.0% | -7.6% | +6.5% | +0.4% | +11.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.2% | -1.8% | +7.7% | +5.5% | +12.9% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -9.8% | -0.4% | +1.9% | +9.6% | +3.5% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +78.0% | -1.9% | +9.2% | -18.6% | +13.3% |
Valuation Metrics
QRHC leads this category, winning 3 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 32.1x trailing earnings, WM trades at a 95% 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 | $24M | $1.6B | $15.5B | $5.4B | $86.9B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $88M | $3.3B | $18.1B | $6.5B | $109.6B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.58x | -9.26x | 39.99x | 712.00x | 32.14x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | — | 34.47x | 62.70x | 26.29x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | — | 1.62x | — | 2.34x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 17.94x | 12.17x | 16.16x | 15.74x | 14.67x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.10x | 0.71x | 2.57x | 2.91x | 3.45x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.60x | 5.26x | 5.66x | 3.46x | 8.71x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 2.59x | — | 35.13x | 63.16x | 30.85x |
Profitability & Efficiency
WM 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 $-44 for NVRI. CWST carries lower financial leverage with a 0.79x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to NVRI's 6.11x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), WM scores 7/9 vs NVRI's 3/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | -17.8% | -43.7% | +14.4% | +0.5% | +28.9% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -4.9% | -6.2% | +5.2% | +0.2% | +6.1% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.2% | +3.3% | +9.8% | +2.6% | +10.7% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.3% | +4.2% | +10.6% | +2.9% | +11.7% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.60x | 6.11x | 1.26x | 0.79x | 2.29x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $64M | $1.7B | $2.6B | $1.1B | $22.7B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1M | $104M | $826M | $124M | $201M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $65M | $1.8B | $3.4B | $1.2B | $22.9B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.37x | -0.10x | 6.34x | 1.12x | 4.89x |
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 $31,039 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $3,305 for QRHC. Over the past 12 months, NVRI leads with a +171.3% total return vs QRHC's -52.5%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors CLH at 28.6% vs QRHC's -40.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -41.9% | +7.6% | +19.6% | -13.4% | -1.0% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -52.5% | +171.3% | +28.4% | -27.9% | -6.2% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -78.9% | +105.8% | +112.9% | -6.3% | +32.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -67.0% | -10.5% | +210.4% | +26.6% | +60.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -64.1% | +192.3% | +515.7% | +1059.3% | +291.1% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -40.5% | +27.2% | +28.6% | -2.2% | +10.0% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — NVRI and WM 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 QRHC's 1.18 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. NVRI currently trades 96.4% from its 52-week high vs QRHC's 43.6% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | 1.18x | 1.17x | 0.64x | 0.33x | -0.21x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.64 | $19.98 | $316.98 | $121.04 | $248.13 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.81 | $6.87 | $201.34 | $74.05 | $194.11 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +43.6% | +96.4% | +91.9% | +70.6% | +86.8% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.0 | 48.7 | 34.2 | 54.3 | 39.8 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 64K | 1.1M | 516K | 849K | 1.9M |
Analyst Outlook
WM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: NVRI as "Buy", CLH as "Buy", CWST as "Buy", WM as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 31.5% upside for CWST (target: $112) vs 2.8% for CLH (target: $299). WM is the only dividend payer here at 1.53% yield — a key consideration for income-focused portfolios.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $25.00 | $299.33 | $112.33 | $254.67 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 9 | 28 | 19 | 35 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +0.0% | — | — | +1.5% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 0 | 0 | 1 | 24 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $0.00 | — | — | $3.30 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% |
WM leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). QRHC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
QRHC vs NVRI vs CLH vs CWST vs WM: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is QRHC or NVRI or CLH or CWST or WM a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Casella Waste Systems, Inc.
(CWST) is the stronger pick with 18. 0% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -13. 3% for Quest Resource Holding Corporation (QRHC). Waste Management, Inc. (WM) offers the better valuation at 32. 1x trailing P/E (26. 3x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Enviri Corporation (NVRI) a "Buy" — based on 9 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 — QRHC or NVRI or CLH or CWST or WM?
On trailing P/E, Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the cheapest at 32. 1x versus Casella Waste Systems, Inc. at 712. 0x. On forward P/E, Waste Management, Inc. is actually cheaper at 26. 3x. 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 — QRHC or NVRI or CLH or CWST or WM?
Over the past 5 years, Clean Harbors, Inc.
(CLH) delivered a total return of +210. 4%, compared to -67. 0% for Quest Resource Holding Corporation (QRHC). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: CWST returned +1059% versus QRHC's -64. 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 — QRHC or NVRI or CLH or CWST or WM?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 21β versus Quest Resource Holding Corporation's 1. 18β — meaning QRHC is approximately -668% more volatile than WM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Casella Waste Systems, Inc. (CWST) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 79% versus 6% for Enviri Corporation — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — QRHC or NVRI or CLH or CWST or WM?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Casella Waste Systems, Inc.
(CWST) is pulling ahead at 18. 0% versus -13. 3% for Quest Resource Holding Corporation (QRHC). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Quest Resource Holding Corporation grew EPS 0. 0% 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 — QRHC or NVRI or CLH or CWST or WM?
Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the more profitable company, earning 10. 7% net margin versus -7. 5% for Enviri Corporation — meaning it keeps 10. 7% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: WM leads at 18. 3% versus -0. 1% for QRHC. 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.
07Is QRHC or NVRI or CLH or CWST or WM 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 62. 7x for Casella Waste Systems, Inc. — 36. 4x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for CWST: 31. 5% to $112. 33.
08Which pays a better dividend — QRHC or NVRI or CLH or CWST or WM?
In this comparison, WM (1.
5% yield) pays a dividend. QRHC, NVRI, CLH, CWST do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is QRHC or NVRI or CLH or CWST or WM better for a retirement portfolio?
For long-horizon retirement investors, Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β -0. 21), 1. 5% yield, +291. 1% 10Y return). Both have compounded well over 10 years (WM: +291. 1%, QRHC: -64. 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 QRHC and NVRI and CLH and CWST and WM?
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: QRHC is a small-cap quality compounder stock; NVRI is a small-cap quality compounder stock; CLH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CWST is a small-cap high-growth stock; WM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. WM pays a dividend while QRHC, NVRI, 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.