Casella Waste Systems vs Waste Management
CWST and WM side by side, both in electric, gas, and sanitary services. Figures are trailing twelve months unless noted, from SEC filings and end-of-day prices.
How CWST and WM compare
Waste Management is the larger company, worth 16 times as much as Casella Waste Systems ($93.3B against $5.9B).
On earnings, Waste Management is cheaper: it trades at 33.1× trailing earnings, against 1037× for Casella Waste Systems.
Waste Management keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.1% compared with 0.29% at Casella Waste Systems.
Waste Management pays a dividend yielding 1.6%; Casella Waste Systems does not pay one.
Waste Management scores higher on the StockData Score (13 against 9 for Casella Waste Systems), which adds up 30 checks on valuation, growth, past performance, financial health and dividends.
Key numbers
A dot marks the better figure where higher or lower is clearly better.
| Metric | CWST | WM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $5.9B | $93.3B |
| Share price | $93.33 | $233.45 |
| Change, 1 year | 10.9% | 18.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 8.5% | 46.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.42 | 0.29 |
| Employees | 5,600 | 61K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 9 | 13 (better) |
| Valuation score | 2 | 2 |
| Growth score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 2 | 5 (better) |
| Health score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 1037× | 33.1× (better) |
| P/S | 3.0× (better) | 3.6× |
| P/B | 3.8× (better) | 9.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 18.6× | 15.4× (better) |
| P/FCF | 56.2× | 26.1× (better) |
| PEG | – | 4.40 |
| FCF yield | 1.8% | 3.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $95.62 | $189.16 |
| Margin of safety | 2.4% (better) | −23.4% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 13.6% | – |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 18.9% (better) | 10.6% |
| Net income growth (TTM) | −48.4% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | −50.0% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | −42.2% | 13.7% (better) |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 33.4% | 40.9% (better) |
| Operating margin | 3.4% | 17.6% (better) |
| Net margin | 0.29% | 11.1% (better) |
| FCF margin | 5.4% | 13.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | 0.36% | 29.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 1.6% | 10.8% (better) |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 0.85 (better) | 2.35 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 3.39 | 3.03 (better) |
| Interest coverage | 1.0× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.99 (better) | 0.91 |
| Altman Z-score | 2.36 | 2.93 (better) |
| Piotroski F-score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.6% |
| Payout ratio | – | 50.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 8.6% |
| Shareholder yield | 0.00% | 1.6% (better) |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 121% | 83.3% |
| Held by insiders | 1.7% | 0.23% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | −$5.6M (better) | −$23.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 8.1% | 2.0% |
Go deeper
- CWST stock overview
- CWST income statement
- CWST valuation and score
- WM stock overview
- WM income statement
- WM valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.