Advertisement
GFL vs WM
Which Stock Would AI Choose? GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Waste Management (WM) Stock Comparison
Key Takeaways
- GFL Environmental and Waste Management both operate in North American waste services, but they differ sharply in scale, strategy, and risk profile.
- WM is the larger, more diversified incumbent with a premium valuation, a long dividend-growth record, and a major healthcare integration underway.
- GFL has delivered faster margin expansion and aggressive share repurchases, but carries higher leverage and a more volatile, growth-oriented profile.
- Recent momentum favors GFL on operating execution, while WM's trend remains in a choppy consolidation despite strong free cash flow (FCF) guidance.
- Investors weighing steady income versus turnaround growth will find these names represent two distinct ends of the same sector.
Introduction
GFL Environmental Inc. (GFL) and Waste Management Inc. (WM) are two of North America's most closely watched environmental services providers. Although both generate durable revenue from waste collection, disposal, and recycling, their market positioning, financial profiles, and investor bases differ meaningfully. This stock comparison is especially relevant for investors seeking exposure to a defensive, non-cyclical sector while evaluating the trade-off between WM's scale and dividend reliability and GFL's faster growth and margin trajectory. Understanding their relative performance, growth drivers, and risk factors can help both long-term investors and active traders assess which name better fits current market conditions.
GFL Overview and Recent Performance
GFL Environmental is the fourth-largest diversified environmental services company in North America, headquartered in Vaughan, Ontario, with operations across Canada and 18 U.S. states and roughly 15,000 employees. The company has pursued an acquisition-heavy growth strategy, completing more than 290 acquisitions since 2007. A defining recent event was the divestiture of its Environmental Services line of business in early 2025, which monetized the unit at an $8.0 billion enterprise value while retaining a meaningful equity interest.
In recent quarters, GFL has reported record adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization) margins, reaching roughly 31.6% in its third quarter, and has consistently beaten expectations on profitability. Management has also returned significant capital to shareholders, repurchasing billions of dollars in stock. This execution has supported a more constructive sentiment, though the company's higher leverage and Canadian-dollar exposure remain key considerations. Analysts have largely maintained buy ratings, with average price targets implying meaningful upside.
WM Overview and Recent Performance
Waste Management is the largest integrated provider of waste collection, disposal, and recycling services in North America, with a market capitalization approaching $90 billion. The company's growth strategy has pivoted toward higher-value services, most notably through its acquisition of Stericycle, a medical waste and secure information destruction business, which it has been integrating as WM Healthcare Solutions. The company also continues to invest heavily in recycling automation and renewable natural gas facilities.
Recent quarters have presented a mixed picture for WM. Its core collection and disposal business has posted record margins, but revenue and earnings per share have occasionally come in modestly below consensus, partly reflecting softness in recycled commodity prices and integration friction in the healthcare unit. The stock has traded in a broad consolidation range rather than a clear uptrend. Offsetting these pressures, WM has raised its dividend for more than two decades, announced a multi-billion-dollar buyback authorization, and guided toward significant free cash flow growth, underpinning a defensive, income-oriented appeal.
Trending AI Robots
For traders looking to automate their approach to stocks like GFL and WM, Tickeron's Trending AI Robots page offers a curated view of its most compelling automated strategies. Tickeron hosts hundreds of AI trading bots that collectively trade thousands of different tickers, each with distinct trading styles, strategies, timeframes, performance metrics, and watchlists. Because not every bot suits every market environment, Tickeron surfaces only the best-performing and most relevant bots for current conditions in this section. This makes it a useful starting point for traders seeking data-driven, rule-based exposure without manually screening the full catalog. Explore the Trending AI Robots to see which strategies are currently leading the field.
Head-to-Head Comparison
The clearest contrast between these two companies is scale and maturity. WM generates roughly four times the annual revenue of GFL and commands a premium valuation, trading at a price-to-earnings multiple in the low-to-mid 30s. GFL, by contrast, offers a lower-multiple, faster-growing profile supported by aggressive pricing, margin expansion, and share buybacks, but it also carries higher leverage and greater sensitivity to foreign exchange and interest rates.
Growth drivers diverge as well. WM's story is anchored in sustainability infrastructure and the cross-selling synergies from its healthcare acquisition, while GFL's is rooted in organic pricing, volume stability, and ongoing tuck-in acquisitions. On risk, WM faces integration execution and commodity-price exposure, whereas GFL's leverage and M&A (mergers and acquisitions) cadence introduce balance-sheet and execution risk. Market sentiment has been relatively more constructive toward GFL's improving fundamentals, while WM's premium valuation and consolidation phase have kept sentiment more mixed.
Tickeron AI Verdict
Based on observable factors such as trend consistency, catalyst visibility, and relative positioning, Tickeron's AI would likely tilt toward GFL in the current environment. GFL's combination of record margins, sustained earnings beats, and shareholder-friendly capital allocation suggests more favorable momentum and a cleaner near-term catalyst path than WM, which remains caught between solid core fundamentals and lingering healthcare-integration and commodity headwinds. That said, WM's superior stability, scale, and free cash flow generation make it a more defensive candidate. In probabilistic terms, GFL appears better positioned for relative outperformance if current trends persist, while WM offers a steadier, lower-volatility profile better suited to risk-averse investors.
Disclaimer
The information on this webpage is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not intended as investment advice, a recommendation to purchase or sell any security, or an offer or solicitation related to investments. It does not consider your personal financial situation, goals, or risk profile, and all investing carries inherent risks, including the possibility of losing your entire investment. For more details, please review our full disclaimer.
To compare these two companies we present long-term analysis, their fundamental ratings and make comparative short-term technical analysis which are presented below. The conclusion is GFL is a Buy and WM is a StrongBuy.
GFL | WM | ||
|---|---|---|---|
OUTLOOK RATING 1..100 | 76 | 7 | |
VALUATION overvalued / fair valued / undervalued 1..100 | 85 Overvalued | 33 Fair valued | |
PROFIT vs RISK RATING 1..100 | 75 | 31 | |
SMR RATING 1..100 | 92 | 34 | |
PRICE GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 53 | 60 | |
P/E GROWTH RATING 1..100 | 100 | 51 | |
SEASONALITY SCORE 1..100 | 50 | 50 |
Tickeron ratings are formulated such that a rating of 1 designates the most successful stocks in a given industry, while a rating of 100 points to the least successful stocks for that industry.
WM's Valuation (33) in the Environmental Services industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GFL (85) in the null industry. This means that WM’s stock grew somewhat faster than GFL’s over the last 12 months.
WM's Profit vs Risk Rating (31) in the Environmental Services industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GFL (75) in the null industry. This means that WM’s stock grew somewhat faster than GFL’s over the last 12 months.
WM's SMR Rating (34) in the Environmental Services industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GFL (92) in the null industry. This means that WM’s stock grew somewhat faster than GFL’s over the last 12 months.
GFL's Price Growth Rating (53) in the null industry is in the same range as WM (60) in the Environmental Services industry. This means that GFL’s stock grew similarly to WM’s over the last 12 months.
WM's P/E Growth Rating (51) in the Environmental Services industry is somewhat better than the same rating for GFL (100) in the null industry. This means that WM’s stock grew somewhat faster than GFL’s over the last 12 months.
| GFL | WM | |
|---|---|---|
| RSI ODDS (%) | N/A | 1 day ago 75% |
| Stochastic ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 69% | 1 day ago 46% |
| Momentum ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 62% | N/A |
| MACD ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 51% | 1 day ago 41% |
| TrendWeek ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 66% | 1 day ago 50% |
| TrendMonth ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 67% | 1 day ago 39% |
| Advances ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 64% | 1 day ago 48% |
| Declines ODDS (%) | 6 days ago 65% | 6 days ago 45% |
| BollingerBands ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 84% | 1 day ago 56% |
| Aroon ODDS (%) | 1 day ago 70% | 1 day ago 28% |
Long-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a long-term outlook for a ticker by using Fundamental Analysis (FA) ratings. The rating of 1 to 100, where 1 is best and 100 is worst, is divided into thirds. The first third (a green rating of 1-33) indicates that the ticker is undervalued; the second third (a grey number between 34 and 66) means that the ticker is valued fairly; and the last third (red number of 67 to 100) reflects that the ticker is overvalued. We use an FA Score to show how many ratings show the ticker to be undervalued (green) or overvalued (red).
GFL’s FA Score shows that 0 FA rating(s) are green while WM’s FA Score has 2 green FA rating(s).
- GFL’s FA Score: 0 green, 5 red.
- WM’s FA Score: 2 green, 3 red.
Short-Term Analysis
It is best to consider a short-term outlook for a ticker by using Technical Analysis (TA) indicators. We use Odds of Success as the percentage of outcomes which confirm successful trade signals in the past.
If the Odds of Success (the likelihood of the continuation of a trend) for each indicator are greater than 50%, then the generated signal is confirmed. A green percentage from 90% to 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bullish trend. A red percentage from 90% - 51% indicates that the ticker is in a bearish trend. All grey percentages are below 50% and are considered not to confirm the trend signal.
GFL’s TA Score shows that 6 TA indicator(s) are bullish while WM’s TA Score has 4 bullish TA indicator(s).
- GFL’s TA Score: 6 bullish, 3 bearish.
- WM’s TA Score: 4 bullish, 4 bearish.
Price Growth
GFL (@Environmental Services) experienced а +2.13% price change this week, while WM (@Environmental Services) price change was +0.11% for the same time period.
The average weekly price growth across all stocks in the @Environmental Services industry was -0.29%. For the same industry, the average monthly price growth was -12.66%, and the average quarterly price growth was -3.53%.
Reported Earning Dates
WM is expected to report earnings on Oct 27, 2026.
Industries' Descriptions
@Environmental Services (-0.29% weekly)Environmental Services includes companies that collect and dispose of hazardous and non-hazardous waste. Their services include removal of toxic waste from soil, removing medical waste etc. Some companies also operate incinerators, sewerage systems, waste treatment plants, and landfills. Demand for waste management is likely to rise with increasing urbanization/industrialization. Waste Management, Inc., Republic Services, Inc., Waste Connections, Inc. and Tetra Tech, Inc. are some of the major companies in this business.
Advertisement
GFL and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, GFL has been loosely correlated with WCN. These tickers have moved in lockstep 52% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is some statistical probability that if GFL jumps, then WCN could also see price increases.
WM and
Correlation & Price change
A.I.dvisor indicates that over the last year, WM has been closely correlated with RSG. These tickers have moved in lockstep 82% of the time. This A.I.-generated data suggests there is a high statistical probability that if WM jumps, then RSG could also see price increases.