Waste Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
QRHC vs RSG vs WM vs CWST vs CLH
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Waste Management
Waste Management
Waste Management
Waste Management
QRHC vs RSG vs WM vs CWST vs CLH — 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 | $61.80B | $86.87B | $5.35B | $15.52B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $244M | $16.70B | $25.41B | $1.88B | $6.06B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $-7M | $2.17B | $2.79B | $7M | $395M |
| Gross Margin | 14.8% | 31.5% | 32.1% | 17.4% | 30.0% |
| Operating Margin | 0.8% | 20.0% | 18.5% | 4.5% | 11.2% |
| Forward P/E | — | 27.6x | 26.3x | 62.7x | 34.5x |
| Total Debt | $65M | $596M | $22.91B | $1.24B | $3.45B |
| Cash & Equiv. | $1M | $76M | $201M | $124M | $826M |
QRHC vs RSG vs WM vs CWST vs CLH — 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% |
| Republic Services, … (RSG) | 100 | 234.1 | +134.1% |
| Waste Management, I… (WM) | 100 | 201.8 | +101.8% |
| Casella Waste Syste… (CWST) | 100 | 167.7 | +67.7% |
| Clean Harbors, Inc. (CLH) | 100 | 490.2 | +390.2% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: QRHC vs RSG vs WM vs CWST vs CLH
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.
RSG has the current edge in this matchup, primarily because of its strength in quality and efficiency.
- 13.0% margin vs QRHC's -3.0%
- 6.4% ROA vs QRHC's -4.9%, ROIC 13.5% vs -0.2%
WM is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if income & stability is your priority.
- 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 RSG's 1.2%, (3 stocks pay no dividend)
CWST ranks third and is worth considering specifically for growth exposure and sleep-well-at-night.
- Rev growth 18.0%, EPS growth -47.8%, 3Y rev CAGR 19.2%
- Lower volatility, beta 0.33, Low D/E 79.0%, current ratio 1.26x
- Beta 0.33, current ratio 1.26x
- 18.0% revenue growth vs QRHC's -13.3%
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
- +28.4% vs QRHC's -52.5%
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 18.0% revenue growth vs QRHC's -13.3% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (26.3x vs 62.7x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 13.0% margin vs QRHC's -3.0% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 0.33 vs QRHC's 1.18, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield, 24-year raise streak, vs RSG's 1.2%, (3 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +28.4% vs QRHC's -52.5% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 6.4% ROA vs QRHC's -4.9%, ROIC 13.5% vs -0.2% |
QRHC vs RSG vs WM vs CWST vs CLH — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
QRHC vs RSG vs WM vs CWST vs CLH — 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
QRHC 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 — 104.4x QRHC's $244M. RSG is the more profitable business, keeping 13.0% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to QRHC's -3.0%. On growth, CWST holds the edge at +9.6% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $244M | $16.7B | $25.4B | $1.9B | $6.1B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $7M | $5.3B | $7.7B | $414M | $1.1B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | -$7M | $2.2B | $2.8B | $7M | $395M |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $10M | $2.6B | $3.3B | $102M | $466M |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +14.8% | +31.5% | +32.1% | +17.4% | +30.0% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +0.8% | +20.0% | +18.5% | +4.5% | +11.2% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | -3.0% | +13.0% | +11.0% | +0.4% | +6.5% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +4.2% | +15.5% | +12.9% | +5.5% | +7.7% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -9.8% | +2.6% | +3.5% | +9.6% | +1.9% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +78.0% | +7.6% | +13.3% | -18.6% | +9.2% |
Valuation Metrics
QRHC 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 | $24M | $61.8B | $86.9B | $5.4B | $15.5B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $88M | $62.3B | $109.6B | $6.5B | $18.1B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | -1.58x | 29.20x | 32.14x | 712.00x | 39.99x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | — | 27.60x | 26.29x | 62.70x | 34.47x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | — | 1.64x | 2.34x | — | 1.62x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 17.94x | 11.87x | 14.67x | 15.74x | 16.16x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 0.10x | 3.72x | 3.45x | 2.91x | 2.57x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 0.60x | 5.21x | 8.71x | 3.46x | 5.66x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 2.59x | 25.65x | 30.85x | 63.16x | 35.13x |
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 $-18 for QRHC. 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 | -17.8% | +18.1% | +28.9% | +0.5% | +14.4% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | -4.9% | +6.4% | +6.1% | +0.2% | +5.2% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | -0.2% | +13.5% | +10.7% | +2.6% | +9.8% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | -0.3% | +11.3% | +11.7% | +2.9% | +10.6% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 4 | 8 | 7 | 4 | 5 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.60x | 0.05x | 2.29x | 0.79x | 1.26x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $64M | $520M | $22.7B | $1.1B | $2.6B |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $1M | $76M | $201M | $124M | $826M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $65M | $596M | $22.9B | $1.2B | $3.4B |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 0.37x | 8.35x | 4.89x | 1.12x | 6.34x |
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 $3,305 for QRHC. Over the past 12 months, CLH leads with a +28.4% 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% | -4.2% | -1.0% | -13.4% | +19.6% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -52.5% | -18.8% | -6.2% | -27.9% | +28.4% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -78.9% | +41.8% | +32.9% | -6.3% | +112.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -67.0% | +88.0% | +60.4% | +26.6% | +210.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | -64.1% | +350.5% | +291.1% | +1059.3% | +515.7% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | -40.5% | +12.4% | +10.0% | -2.2% | +28.6% |
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 QRHC's 1.18 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 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 | -0.18x | -0.21x | 0.33x | 0.64x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $2.64 | $258.75 | $248.13 | $121.04 | $316.98 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $0.81 | $198.24 | $194.11 | $74.05 | $201.34 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +43.6% | +77.3% | +86.8% | +70.6% | +91.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 38.0 | 35.6 | 39.8 | 54.3 | 34.2 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 64K | 1.4M | 1.9M | 849K | 516K |
Analyst Outlook
WM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: RSG as "Buy", WM as "Buy", CWST as "Buy", CLH as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 31.5% upside for CWST (target: $112) vs 2.8% for CLH (target: $299). For income investors, WM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.53% vs RSG's 1.18%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | — | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | — | $239.89 | $254.67 | $112.33 | $299.33 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | — | 35 | 35 | 19 | 28 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | — | +1.2% | +1.5% | — | — |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | — | 23 | 24 | 1 | 0 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | — | $2.37 | $3.30 | — | — |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | 0.0% | +1.4% | 0.0% | 0.0% | +1.6% |
RSG leads in 2 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). QRHC leads in 1 (Valuation Metrics). 1 tied.
QRHC vs RSG vs WM vs CWST vs CLH: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is QRHC or RSG or WM or CWST or CLH 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). 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 Republic Services, Inc. (RSG) a "Buy" — based on 35 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 RSG or WM or CWST or CLH?
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 — QRHC or RSG or WM or CWST or CLH?
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 RSG or WM or CWST or CLH?
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, 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 — QRHC or RSG or WM or CWST or CLH?
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: Republic Services, Inc. grew EPS 5. 5% 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 RSG or WM or CWST or CLH?
Republic Services, Inc.
(RSG) is the more profitable company, earning 12. 9% net margin versus -6. 1% for Quest Resource Holding Corporation — 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 -0. 1% for QRHC. 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 QRHC or RSG or WM or CWST or CLH 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 RSG or WM or CWST or CLH?
In this comparison, WM (1.
5% yield), RSG (1. 2% yield) pay a dividend. QRHC, CWST, CLH do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is QRHC or RSG or WM or CWST or CLH 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). Both have compounded well over 10 years (RSG: +350. 5%, 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 RSG and WM and CWST and CLH?
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; RSG is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; WM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CWST is a small-cap high-growth stock; CLH is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. RSG, WM pay a dividend while QRHC, CWST, CLH 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.