GFL Environmental vs Republic Services
GFL and RSG 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 GFL and RSG compare
GFL Environmental grew revenue faster over the last twelve months (7.8% versus 2.9% for Republic Services).
GFL Environmental keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 58.0% compared with 11.3% at Republic Services.
Republic Services pays a dividend yielding 1.0%; GFL Environmental does not pay one.
Republic Services scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 6 for GFL Environmental), 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 | GFL | RSG |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | – | $74.7B |
| Share price | $45.21 | $244.04 |
| Change, 1 year | 3.0% | 15.9% |
| Change, 5 years | 14.3% | 83.8% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.80 | 0.37 |
| Employees | 15K | 31K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 6 | 15 (better) |
| Valuation score | 0 | 0 |
| Growth score | 2 | 2 |
| Performance score | 3 | 6 (better) |
| Health score | 1 | 3 (better) |
| Dividend score | 0 | 4 (better) |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | – | 34.6× |
| P/S | – | 3.9× |
| P/B | – | 6.2× |
| EV/EBITDA | – | 16.9× |
| P/FCF | – | 28.2× |
| PEG | – | 2.57 |
| FCF yield | – | 3.6% |
| Fair value | – | $181.29 |
| Margin of safety | – | −34.6% |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 7.8% (better) | 2.9% |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.5% | 9.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | – | 3.0% |
| EPS growth (TTM) | – | 4.4% |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | – | 17.8% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 20.7% | 49.3% (better) |
| Operating margin | – | 17.4% |
| Net margin | 58.0% (better) | 11.3% |
| FCF margin | – | 13.7% |
| Return on equity | 53.7% (better) | 18.2% |
| Return on invested capital | – | 11.3% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.02 (better) | 1.17 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | – | 2.67 |
| Interest coverage | – | 5.7× |
| Current ratio | 0.58 | 0.64 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | – | 3.23 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 | 8 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | – | 1.0% |
| Payout ratio | 0.81% | 34.8% |
| Years of dividend growth | – | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | – | 7.7% |
| Buyback yield | – | 2.0% |
| Shareholder yield | – | 3.0% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 74.6% | 59.2% |
| Held by insiders | 20.7% | 38.1% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | – | $1.6B |
| Short interest, % of float | – | 2.5% |
Go deeper
- GFL stock overview
- GFL income statement
- GFL valuation and score
- RSG stock overview
- RSG income statement
- RSG valuation and score
Other comparisons
For information only, not investment advice. Check the source filings before relying on any figure.