Waste Management
Compare Stocks
5 / 10Stock Comparison
WCN vs CEVA vs WM vs RMBS vs RSG
Revenue, margins, valuation, and 5-year total return — side by side.
Semiconductors
Waste Management
Semiconductors
Waste Management
WCN vs CEVA vs WM vs RMBS vs RSG — Key Financials
Market cap, revenue, margins, and valuation side-by-side.
| Company Snapshot | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Industry | Waste Management | Semiconductors | Waste Management | Semiconductors | Waste Management |
| Market Cap | $39.14B | $810M | $89.32B | $13.69B | $62.29B |
| Revenue (TTM) | $9.65B | $108M | $25.41B | $721M | $16.70B |
| Net Income (TTM) | $1.06B | $-11M | $2.79B | $230M | $2.17B |
| Gross Margin | 39.1% | 87.2% | 32.1% | 77.0% | 22.8% |
| Operating Margin | 17.6% | -10.1% | 18.5% | 35.9% | 20.0% |
| Forward P/E | 27.9x | 67.3x | 27.1x | 42.9x | 27.8x |
| Total Debt | $9.40B | $6M | $22.91B | $44M | $596M |
| Cash & Equiv. | $46M | $18M | $201M | $183M | $76M |
WCN vs CEVA vs WM vs RMBS vs RSG — Long-Term Stock Performance
Price return indexed to 100 at period start. Dividends excluded.
| Stock | May 20 | May 26 | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waste Connections, … (WCN) | 100 | 163.3 | +63.3% |
| CEVA, Inc. (CEVA) | 100 | 97.8 | -2.2% |
| Waste Management, I… (WM) | 100 | 207.4 | +107.4% |
| Rambus Inc. (RMBS) | 100 | 814.7 | +714.7% |
| Republic Services, … (RSG) | 100 | 235.9 | +135.9% |
Price return only. Dividends and distributions are not included.
Quick Verdict: WCN vs CEVA vs WM vs RMBS vs RSG
Each card shows where this stock fits in a portfolio — not just who wins on paper.
WCN is the #2 pick in this set and the best alternative if valuation efficiency is your priority.
- PEG 0.70 vs WM's 1.97
- Lower P/E (27.9x vs 42.9x)
CEVA ranks third and is worth considering specifically for sleep-well-at-night and defensive.
- Lower volatility, beta 2.76, Low D/E 2.1%, current ratio 7.09x
- Beta 2.76, current ratio 7.09x
- Beta 2.76 vs RMBS's 3.00, lower leverage
WM is the clearest fit if your priority is income & stability.
- Dividend streak 24 yrs, beta -0.17, yield 1.5%
- 1.5% yield, 24-year raise streak, vs WCN's 0.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend)
RMBS carries the broadest edge in this set and is the clearest fit for growth exposure and long-term compounding.
- Rev growth 27.1%, EPS growth 27.9%, 3Y rev CAGR 15.9%
- 10.1% 10Y total return vs RSG's 353.8%
- 27.1% revenue growth vs RSG's 3.5%
- 31.9% margin vs CEVA's -10.5%
Among these 5 stocks, RSG doesn't own a clear edge in any measured category.
See the full category breakdown
| Category | Winner | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Growth | 27.1% revenue growth vs RSG's 3.5% | |
| Value | Lower P/E (27.9x vs 42.9x) | |
| Quality / Margins | 31.9% margin vs CEVA's -10.5% | |
| Stability / Safety | Beta 2.76 vs RMBS's 3.00, lower leverage | |
| Dividends | 1.5% yield, 24-year raise streak, vs WCN's 0.9%, (2 stocks pay no dividend) | |
| Momentum (1Y) | +148.9% vs WCN's -21.7% | |
| Efficiency (ROA) | 15.5% ROA vs CEVA's -3.7%, ROIC 17.1% vs -2.3% |
WCN vs CEVA vs WM vs RMBS vs RSG — Revenue Breakdown by Segment
How each company's revenue is distributed across its business units
WCN vs CEVA vs WM vs RMBS vs RSG — Financial Metrics
Side-by-side numbers across 5 stocks — who leads on profitability, valuation, growth, and risk.
Who Leads Where
RMBS leads in 3 of 6 categories
WM leads 1 • WCN leads 0 • CEVA leads 0 • RSG leads 0 • 2 tied
Explore the data ↓Income & Cash Flow (Last 12 Months)
RMBS 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 — 236.3x CEVA's $108M. RMBS is the more profitable business, keeping 31.9% of every revenue dollar as net income compared to CEVA's -10.5%. On growth, RMBS holds the edge at +8.1% YoY revenue growth, suggesting stronger near-term business momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RevenueTrailing 12 months | $9.6B | $108M | $25.4B | $721M | $16.7B |
| EBITDAEarnings before interest/tax | $2.7B | -$7M | $7.7B | $288M | $5.3B |
| Net IncomeAfter-tax profit | $1.1B | -$11M | $2.8B | $230M | $2.2B |
| Free Cash FlowCash after capex | $2.2B | -$6M | $3.3B | $335M | $2.6B |
| Gross MarginGross profit ÷ Revenue | +39.1% | +87.2% | +32.1% | +77.0% | +22.8% |
| Operating MarginEBIT ÷ Revenue | +17.6% | -10.1% | +18.5% | +35.9% | +20.0% |
| Net MarginNet income ÷ Revenue | +11.0% | -10.5% | +11.0% | +31.9% | +13.0% |
| FCF MarginFCF ÷ Revenue | +23.1% | -6.0% | +12.9% | +46.5% | +15.5% |
| Rev. Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | +6.4% | +4.3% | +3.5% | +8.1% | +2.6% |
| EPS Growth (YoY)Latest quarter vs prior year | -7.5% | -2.0% | +13.3% | -1.8% | +7.6% |
Valuation Metrics
Evenly matched — CEVA and WM and RSG each lead in 2 of 7 comparable metrics.
Valuation Metrics
At 29.4x trailing earnings, RSG trades at a 51% valuation discount to RMBS's 60.0x P/E. Adjusting for growth (PEG ratio), WCN offers better value at 0.92x vs WM's 2.41x — a lower PEG means you pay less per unit of expected earnings growth.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market CapShares × price | $39.1B | $810M | $89.3B | $13.7B | $62.3B |
| Enterprise ValueMkt cap + debt − cash | $48.5B | $797M | $112.0B | $13.6B | $62.8B |
| Trailing P/EPrice ÷ TTM EPS | 36.74x | -91.14x | 33.05x | 60.00x | 29.43x |
| Forward P/EPrice ÷ next-FY EPS est. | 27.92x | 67.35x | 27.06x | 42.88x | 27.85x |
| PEG RatioP/E ÷ EPS growth rate | 0.92x | — | 2.41x | — | 1.65x |
| EV / EBITDAEnterprise value multiple | 16.38x | — | 15.00x | 46.57x | 11.96x |
| Price / SalesMarket cap ÷ Revenue | 4.12x | 7.57x | 3.54x | 19.35x | 3.75x |
| Price / BookPrice ÷ Book value/share | 4.79x | 2.99x | 8.96x | 10.18x | 5.25x |
| Price / FCFMarket cap ÷ FCF | 31.54x | 1569.47x | 31.72x | 41.10x | 25.86x |
Profitability & Efficiency
RMBS 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 $-4 for CEVA. CEVA carries lower financial leverage with a 0.02x debt-to-equity ratio, signaling a more conservative balance sheet compared to WM's 2.29x. On the Piotroski fundamental quality scale (0–9), WM scores 7/9 vs WCN's 5/9, reflecting strong financial health.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROE (TTM)Return on equity | +12.9% | -4.2% | +28.9% | +17.4% | +18.1% |
| ROA (TTM)Return on assets | +5.0% | -3.7% | +6.1% | +15.5% | +6.4% |
| ROICReturn on invested capital | +7.7% | -2.3% | +10.7% | +17.1% | +13.5% |
| ROCEReturn on capital employed | +9.3% | -2.7% | +11.7% | +19.5% | +11.3% |
| Piotroski ScoreFundamental quality 0–9 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 6 | 7 |
| Debt / EquityFinancial leverage | 1.14x | 0.02x | 2.29x | 0.03x | 0.05x |
| Net DebtTotal debt minus cash | $9.3B | -$13M | $22.7B | -$139M | $520M |
| Cash & Equiv.Liquid assets | $46M | $18M | $201M | $183M | $76M |
| Total DebtShort + long-term debt | $9.4B | $6M | $22.9B | $44M | $596M |
| Interest CoverageEBIT ÷ Interest expense | 5.31x | — | 4.89x | 217.32x | 8.69x |
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
RMBS leads this category, winning 5 of 6 comparable metrics.
Total Returns (Dividends Reinvested)
A $10,000 investment in RMBS five years ago would be worth $65,393 today (with dividends reinvested), compared to $6,465 for CEVA. Over the past 12 months, RMBS leads with a +148.9% total return vs WCN's -21.7%. The 3-year compound annual growth rate (CAGR) favors RMBS at 37.7% vs WCN's 3.5% — a key indicator of consistent wealth creation.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| YTD ReturnYear-to-date | -11.4% | +50.4% | +1.8% | +27.5% | -3.5% |
| 1-Year ReturnPast 12 months | -21.7% | +59.5% | -4.5% | +148.9% | -19.0% |
| 3-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +11.0% | +31.6% | +36.5% | +161.1% | +42.9% |
| 5-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +29.2% | -35.4% | +66.8% | +553.9% | +91.4% |
| 10-Year ReturnCumulative with dividends | +253.8% | +27.2% | +301.0% | +1011.5% | +353.8% |
| CAGR (3Y)Annualised 3-year return | +3.5% | +9.6% | +10.9% | +37.7% | +12.6% |
Risk & Volatility
Evenly matched — CEVA and WM each lead in 1 of 2 comparable metrics.
Risk & Volatility
WM is the less volatile stock with a -0.17 beta — it tends to amplify market swings less than RMBS's 3.00 beta. A beta below 1.0 means the stock typically moves less than the S&P 500. CEVA currently trades 96.7% from its 52-week high vs WCN's 77.2% drawdown — a narrower gap to the peak suggests stronger recent price momentum.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beta (5Y)Sensitivity to S&P 500 | -0.03x | 2.76x | -0.17x | 3.00x | -0.15x |
| 52-Week HighHighest price in past year | $199.00 | $34.87 | $248.13 | $161.80 | $258.75 |
| 52-Week LowLowest price in past year | $152.76 | $17.02 | $194.11 | $49.61 | $198.24 |
| % of 52W HighCurrent price vs 52-week peak | +77.2% | +96.7% | +89.2% | +78.2% | +77.9% |
| RSI (14)Momentum oscillator 0–100 | 36.3 | 78.9 | 38.1 | 58.3 | 31.4 |
| Avg Volume (50D)Average daily shares traded | 1.4M | 498K | 1.9M | 2.2M | 1.4M |
Analyst Outlook
WM leads this category, winning 2 of 2 comparable metrics.
Analyst Outlook
Analyst consensus: WCN as "Buy", CEVA as "Buy", WM as "Buy", RMBS as "Buy", RSG as "Buy". Consensus price targets imply 32.9% upside for WCN (target: $204) vs -13.0% for CEVA (target: $29). For income investors, WM offers the higher dividend yield at 1.49% vs WCN's 0.86%.
| Metric | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analyst RatingConsensus buy/hold/sell | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy | Buy |
| Price TargetConsensus 12-month target | $204.08 | $29.33 | $252.86 | $135.67 | $239.78 |
| # AnalystsCovering analysts | 33 | 23 | 35 | 14 | 35 |
| Dividend YieldAnnual dividend ÷ price | +0.9% | — | +1.5% | — | +1.2% |
| Dividend StreakConsecutive years of raises | 15 | — | 24 | — | 23 |
| Dividend / ShareAnnual DPS | $1.32 | — | $3.30 | — | $2.37 |
| Buyback YieldShare repurchases ÷ mkt cap | +1.3% | +1.0% | 0.0% | +0.1% | +1.4% |
RMBS leads in 3 of 6 categories (Income & Cash Flow, Profitability & Efficiency). WM leads in 1 (Analyst Outlook). 2 tied.
WCN vs CEVA vs WM vs RMBS vs RSG: Key Questions Answered
10 questions · data-driven answers · updated daily
01Is WCN or CEVA or WM or RMBS or RSG a better buy right now?
For growth investors, Rambus Inc.
(RMBS) is the stronger pick with 27. 1% revenue growth year-over-year, versus 3. 5% for Republic Services, Inc. (RSG). Republic Services, Inc. (RSG) offers the better valuation at 29. 4x trailing P/E (27. 8x forward), making it the more compelling value choice. Analysts rate Waste Connections, Inc. (WCN) a "Buy" — based on 33 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 — WCN or CEVA or WM or RMBS or RSG?
On trailing P/E, Republic Services, Inc.
(RSG) is the cheapest at 29. 4x versus Rambus Inc. at 60. 0x. On forward P/E, Waste Management, Inc. is actually cheaper at 27. 1x — 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: Waste Connections, Inc. wins at 0. 70x versus Waste Management, Inc. 's 1. 97x — a PEG below 1. 0 traditionally signals the market is underpricing earnings growth.
03Which is the better long-term investment — WCN or CEVA or WM or RMBS or RSG?
Over the past 5 years, Rambus Inc.
(RMBS) delivered a total return of +553. 9%, compared to -35. 4% for CEVA, Inc. (CEVA). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: RMBS returned +1011% versus CEVA's +27. 2%. 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 — WCN or CEVA or WM or RMBS or RSG?
By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Waste Management, Inc.
(WM) is the lower-risk stock at -0. 17β versus Rambus Inc. 's 3. 00β — meaning RMBS is approximately -1821% more volatile than WM relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, CEVA, Inc. (CEVA) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 2% versus 2% for Waste Management, Inc. — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.
05Which is growing faster — WCN or CEVA or WM or RMBS or RSG?
By revenue growth (latest reported year), Rambus Inc.
(RMBS) is pulling ahead at 27. 1% versus 3. 5% for Republic Services, Inc. (RSG). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Waste Connections, Inc. grew EPS 74. 9% year-over-year, compared to -1. 6% for Waste Management, Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, RMBS leads at 15. 9% 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 — WCN or CEVA or WM or RMBS or RSG?
Rambus Inc.
(RMBS) is the more profitable company, earning 32. 6% net margin versus -8. 2% for CEVA, Inc. — meaning it keeps 32. 6% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: RMBS leads at 36. 8% versus -7. 1% for CEVA. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — CEVA leads at 88. 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 WCN or CEVA or WM or RMBS or RSG 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, Waste Connections, Inc. (WCN) is the more undervalued stock at a PEG of 0. 70x versus Waste Management, Inc. 's 1. 97x. A PEG below 1. 0 is traditionally considered the threshold for growth-adjusted undervaluation. On forward earnings alone, Waste Management, Inc. (WM) trades at 27. 1x forward P/E versus 67. 3x for CEVA, Inc. — 40. 3x cheaper on a one-year earnings basis. Analyst consensus price targets imply the most upside for WCN: 32. 9% to $204. 08.
08Which pays a better dividend — WCN or CEVA or WM or RMBS or RSG?
In this comparison, WM (1.
5% yield), RSG (1. 2% yield), WCN (0. 9% yield) pay a dividend. CEVA, RMBS do not pay a meaningful dividend and should not be held primarily for income.
09Is WCN or CEVA or WM or RMBS or RSG 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. 15), 1. 2% yield, +353. 8% 10Y return). CEVA, Inc. (CEVA) carries a higher beta of 2. 76 — 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: +353. 8%, CEVA: +27. 2%), 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 WCN and CEVA and WM and RMBS and RSG?
These companies operate in different sectors (WCN (Industrials) and CEVA (Technology) and WM (Industrials) and RMBS (Technology) and RSG (Industrials)), which means they face different economic cycles, regulatory environments, and macro sensitivities — making direct comparison nuanced.
In terms of investment character: WCN is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; CEVA is a small-cap quality compounder stock; WM is a mid-cap quality compounder stock; RMBS is a mid-cap high-growth stock; RSG is a mid-cap quality compounder stock. WCN, WM, RSG pay a dividend while CEVA, RMBS 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.