Clean Harbors vs GEO Group
Add, change or remove companies; up to four.
KIRA’s take AI analyst
I put Clean Harbors and GEO Group side by side, using each one’s latest annual report. Here is what stands out:
- Clean Harbors is the larger business, with $6.0B of revenue in fiscal 2025 against $2.6B for GEO Group, about 2.3 times as much.
- GEO Group grew revenue faster (8.6%, against 2.4%).
- Clean Harbors kept more of each dollar of sales as operating profit (11.2% operating margin, against 9.8%).
- Clean Harbors turned more of its sales into free cash flow (7.3% FCF margin, against −4.8%).
- Clean Harbors earned a higher return on the capital invested in it (10.4%, against 6.3%).
- Investors pay more for each dollar of Clean Harbors’s earnings: a P/E of 43.1x against 12.8x for GEO Group.
Who comes out ahead
Of the 10 measures where higher (or lower) is clearly better, how many each company leads.
Clean Harbors
CLH
7/10
5-year growthOperating marginFCF marginReturn on capitalPiotroski F-scoreNet debt / EBITDAShare count change
GEO Group
GEO
3/10
Revenue growthNet marginReturn on equity
Side by side
Best in the row
| Latest fiscal year | CLH FY25 | GEO FY25 |
|---|---|---|
| Size | ||
| Market cap | $16.9B | $3.6B |
| Revenue | $6.0B | $2.6B |
| Free cash flow | $442M | −$125M |
| Net income | $391M | $254M |
| Growth | ||
| Revenue growth | 2.4% | 8.6% |
| 5-year growth | 13.9% | 2.3% |
| Share count change | −0.9% | 4.2% |
| Profitability | ||
| Gross margin | 31.3% | — |
| Operating margin | 11.2% | 9.8% |
| Net margin | 6.5% | 9.7% |
| FCF margin | 7.3% | −4.8% |
| Return on capital | 10.4% | 6.3% |
| Return on equity | 14.7% | 17.9% |
| Balance sheet | ||
| Net debt | $2.1B | $1.6B |
| Net debt / EBITDA | 1.8x | 4.1x |
| Dividends and buybacks | $250M | $91.0M |
| Valuation & quality | ||
| P/E | 43.1x | 12.8x |
| Piotroski F-score | 7 | 6 |
Ten years
Revenue
Operating margin
Free cash flow
Return on capital
Each company's latest fiscal year; fiscal years end in different months. The best value in each row is highlighted where higher (or lower) is clearly better. Not investment advice.