Republic Services vs Waste Management
RSG 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 RSG and WM compare
Waste Management is the larger company, worth 1.2 times as much as Republic Services ($93.3B against $74.7B).
On earnings, Waste Management is cheaper: it trades at 33.1× trailing earnings, against 34.6× for Republic Services.
Republic Services keeps more of each dollar of sales as profit, with a net margin of 11.3% compared with 11.1% at Waste Management.
Both pay dividends: Republic Services yields 1.0% and Waste Management 1.6%.
Republic Services scores higher on the StockData Score (15 against 13 for Waste Management), 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 | RSG | WM |
|---|---|---|
| Size and price | ||
| Market cap | $74.7B | $93.3B |
| Share price | $244.04 | $233.45 |
| Change, 1 year | 15.9% | 18.2% |
| Change, 5 years | 83.8% | 46.0% |
| Beta (5Y) | 0.37 | 0.29 |
| Employees | 31K | 61K |
| StockData Score | ||
| Total score | 15 (better) | 13 |
| Valuation score | 0 | 2 (better) |
| Growth score | 2 (better) | 1 |
| Performance score | 6 (better) | 5 |
| Health score | 3 (better) | 1 |
| Dividend score | 4 | 4 |
| Valuation | ||
| P/E | 34.6× | 33.1× (better) |
| P/S | 3.9× | 3.6× (better) |
| P/B | 6.2× (better) | 9.4× |
| EV/EBITDA | 16.9× | 15.4× (better) |
| P/FCF | 28.2× | 26.1× (better) |
| PEG | 2.57 (better) | 4.40 |
| FCF yield | 3.6% | 3.8% (better) |
| Fair value | $181.29 | $189.16 |
| Margin of safety | −34.6% | −23.4% (better) |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth (TTM) | 2.9% | – |
| Revenue growth, 5Y average | 9.6% | 10.6% (better) |
| Net income growth (TTM) | 3.0% | – |
| EPS growth (TTM) | 4.4% | – |
| EPS growth, 5Y average | 17.8% (better) | 13.7% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 49.3% (better) | 40.9% |
| Operating margin | 17.4% | 17.6% (better) |
| Net margin | 11.3% (better) | 11.1% |
| FCF margin | 13.7% | 13.9% (better) |
| Return on equity | 18.2% | 29.8% (better) |
| Return on invested capital | 11.3% (better) | 10.8% |
| Financial health | ||
| Debt / equity | 1.17 (better) | 2.35 |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 2.67 (better) | 3.03 |
| Interest coverage | 5.7× | – |
| Current ratio | 0.64 | 0.91 (better) |
| Altman Z-score | 3.23 (better) | 2.93 |
| Piotroski F-score | 8 (better) | 6 |
| Dividends and buybacks | ||
| Dividend yield | 1.0% | 1.6% (better) |
| Payout ratio | 34.8% | 50.1% |
| Years of dividend growth | 16 | 16 |
| Dividend growth, 5Y average | 7.7% | 8.6% (better) |
| Buyback yield | 2.0% | – |
| Shareholder yield | 3.0% (better) | 1.6% |
| Ownership | ||
| Held by institutions | 59.2% | 83.3% |
| Held by insiders | 38.1% | 0.23% |
| Insider net buying, 12 months | $1.6B (better) | −$23.8M |
| Superinvestors holding | – | 1 |
| Short interest, % of float | 2.5% | 2.0% |
Go deeper
- RSG stock overview
- RSG income statement
- RSG 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.