Compare waste companies using the same peer set, valuation date, earnings period, and metric definitions. For a practical U.S.-listed comparison, start with Waste Management (WM), Republic Services (RSG), and Waste Connections (WCN), then examine EV/EBITDA alongside operating margins, cash flow after capital spending, and debt obligations. A single multiple or leverage ratio cannot establish which company is fairly valued or financially stronger.
Which waste companies are comparable?
WM, RSG, and WCN are useful starting peers because each has substantial solid-waste operations, but they are not identical businesses. Compare their business descriptions and segment disclosures before treating their financial ratios as like-for-like. WM and RSG filings provide primary company information; WCN describes collection, transfer and disposal alongside rail-based intermodal operations, resource recovery, and exploration-and-production (E&P) waste treatment and disposal.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Differences in collection, landfill ownership, recycling, renewable energy, healthcare or environmental services, and special-waste exposure can affect margins, capital needs, and growth. Acquisitions and commodity exposure can also shift reported results. Separate organic growth from acquisition-driven growth wherever company disclosures allow.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Use each company’s annual filing to check segment definitions and financial disclosures: WM’s 2025 Form 10-K, Republic Services’ 2025 Form 10-K, and Waste Connections’ 2025 Form 10-K.
#1 Best Overall
How should you compare valuation?
Use a common EV/EBITDA definition
Enterprise value (EV) is generally equity market value plus debt and other debt-like claims, less cash and cash equivalents. Apply one consistent convention for leases, minority interests, and preferred securities where relevant. Divide by the same kind of EBITDA for every company, and state whether it is reported or adjusted and whether the period is last twelve months (LTM), last fiscal year, or next twelve months (NTM).
Market-based multiples depend on share prices and the date used, while the EBITDA denominator depends on the period and measure selected. State the exact market date and period. Do not mix a trailing multiple for one company with a forward multiple for another.
Interpret the multiple in context
A lower EV/EBITDA multiple is not automatically a bargain. It may reflect slower growth, more leverage, lower-quality assets, greater exposure to volatile business lines, or different accounting and adjustment choices. A premium multiple likewise needs support from company-specific evidence, such as durable pricing, growth, margins, or cash generation.
A Truist market update provides an example of historical peer comparisons, not a current quote: its July 2024 snapshot reports LTM and NTM EV/EBITDA values and historical LTM margin figures for a selected group of solid-waste companies. Treat those figures as historical context only. Read the July 2024 Truist market update.
How should you compare margins and earnings quality?
Do not treat “EBITDA margin” as a uniform measure. Start with GAAP operating margin, then examine each company’s adjusted EBITDA definition and reconciliation. Adjustments, segment allocations, acquisitions, accounting changes, and unusual items can make similar labels represent different calculations.
Use a margin bridge to understand what changed: revenue growth; pricing versus volume where disclosed; operating costs; depreciation and amortization; segment or corporate allocations; and adjustments used to calculate company-reported EBITDA. Compare several years and the latest quarter to distinguish sustained operating changes from one-off effects.
Recent reported figures illustrate why labels and reconciliations matter:
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
- Waste Connections reported a 33.0% adjusted EBITDA margin for 2025, up 250 basis points, in its 2025 annual report. This is a company-defined adjusted measure, not a directly harmonized peer comparison. Waste Connections’ 2025 annual report.
- WM reported a 30.1% operating EBITDA margin for 2025 in its 2025 annual results material. WM cited operating factors as well as headwinds related to its Healthcare Solutions acquisition and the expiration of alternative-fuel tax credits. Check the company’s measure and adjustments before comparing it with a competitor’s figure. WM’s 2025 annual results material.
These figures should not be used to rank the companies: the measures are not established here as identically defined. Republic Services’ 2025 Form 10-K is a primary source for its disclosures, but the figures above do not provide a directly harmonized three-company margin comparison.
Best Value
How should you assess debt and ability to service it?
Debt/EBITDA is a starting ratio, not a full assessment of debt risk. Companies may define leverage differently, so record each issuer’s stated ratio and calculate a normalized ratio using the same debt and EBITDA conventions across peers. Review gross debt, cash and net debt as well as the ratio.
Then examine the obligations and cash available around that debt: maturities, interest expense, fixed- or floating-rate exposure where disclosed, liquidity, capital expenditures, and free cash flow. Collection fleets, landfills, and facilities require capital, so EBITDA is not cash available for repayment. Distinguish maintenance spending from growth spending when disclosures permit.
- Waste Connections reported year-end 2025 debt-to-EBITDA leverage of 2.75x in its 2025 annual report. It is company-defined; consult its non-GAAP disclosures and applicable credit agreement definitions before comparing it with a peer’s ratio. Waste Connections’ 2025 annual report.
- WM reported a 3.1x leverage ratio in its 2025 annual results material. Confirm the supporting definition and period before comparing it directly with a competitor’s measure. WM’s 2025 annual results material.
Cash-flow measures also need careful interpretation. WM’s 2025 Form 10-K says its free-cash-flow measure has material limitations because it excludes expenditures that are required or committed, including declared dividends and debt service requirements. Read that measure alongside the cash-flow statements and obligations rather than treating it as cash freely available to equity holders. WM’s 2025 Form 10-K.
What should a side-by-side comparison include?
Build one worksheet with consistent dates and definitions. Keep the issuer’s reported measures visible next to normalized calculations so that differences do not disappear inside a ratio.
Quick Recap
| Comparison area | What to line up | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Valuation | EV/EBITDA on the same date and LTM, fiscal-year, or NTM basis | Share prices and denominator choices change the multiple. |
| Margins | GAAP operating margin and reconciled adjusted EBITDA margin | Adjustments and segment mix can distort a headline comparison. |
| Debt | Gross debt, net debt, leverage definition, maturities, and interest burden | Similar leverage ratios can conceal different debt costs or refinancing needs. |
| Cash conversion | Operating cash flow less capital expenditures, with working capital and acquisition spending considered | Waste assets require capital, and EBITDA is not cash flow. |
| Business mix and growth | Collection and disposal, recycling, energy, special waste, acquisitions, pricing, and volume | Different revenue streams and growth sources influence risk and valuation. |
How do you reach a fair comparison?
- Define the peer set and scope. Start with WM, RSG, and WCN for a North American solid-waste comparison, then note business and segment differences from their filings.
- Fix the valuation date and denominator. Use market data from one stated date and the same LTM, fiscal-year, or NTM EBITDA basis for every company.
- Reconcile margins. Compare GAAP operating margins and inspect adjusted EBITDA definitions, reconciliation tables, and segment effects.
- Normalize leverage and inspect obligations. Preserve each company’s reported ratio, calculate a consistent comparison, and review maturities, interest, liquidity, and capital needs.
- Connect earnings to cash. Compare operating cash generation after capital spending, while accounting for working capital and acquisition spending, before drawing conclusions from valuation or leverage alone.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
