GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value (GFL) vs Perma-Fix Environmental Services (PESI)
Head-to-head comparison of performance, valuation, growth, profitability and dividends. Prices delayed 15 minutes; data as of Oct 9, 2026.
Summary
Perma-Fix Environmental Services (PESI) has outperformed GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value (GFL) over the past year, gaining 30.9% versus a loss of 5.3%. Over five years, PESI leads with a +99.1% price change compared with +9.4% for GFL. GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value is the larger company by market cap ($15.44 billion vs $292.0 million), about 52.9 times the size.
On valuation, GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value trades at a lower forward P/E (44.0x vs 152.9x for Perma-Fix Environmental Services). GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value pays a dividend yielding 0.20%, while Perma-Fix Environmental Services does not currently pay one.
Summary generated from market data by MetaCap's automated system. Methodology
Relative performance
Percent change in share price from the first common trading day shown; excludes dividends.
Head-to-head
| Metric | GFL | PESI |
|---|---|---|
| Share price | $42.78 | $13.76 |
| Market cap | $15.44B | $291.96M |
| 1-day change | +1.06% | -2.82% |
| YTD return | -0.40% | +9.29% |
| 1-year return | -5.31% | +30.92% |
| 5-year return | +9.36% | +99.13% |
| Forward P/E | 44.00 | 152.89 |
| EPS (TTM) | $-0.47 | $-0.96 |
| Dividend yield | 0.20% | 0.00% |
| Annual dividend | $0.084 | $0.00 |
| 52-week high | $47.01 | $21.32 |
| 52-week low | $33.33 | $8.58 |
| Distance from 52-week high | -9.00% | -35.46% |
| Analyst consensus | buy | strong_buy |
| Avg. price target upside | +17.91% | +118.02% |
| Average volume | 2.64M | 433.42K |
| Shares outstanding | 349.08M | 21.22M |
| Employees | 15,500 | 293 |
| Sector | Utilities | Industrials |
| Industry | Environmental Services | Environmental Services |
Highlighted cells mark the higher value for growth, returns, margins and yield, and the lower value for P/E ratios. Highlighting is a mechanical comparison, not a recommendation.
Key differences
- GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value is about 52.9 times larger than Perma-Fix Environmental Services by market value ($15.44B vs $291.96M).
- PESI has outperformed GFL by 36.2 percentage points over the past year.
- The two companies sit in different sectors: GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value in Utilities and Perma-Fix Environmental Services in Industrials.
About GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value
GFL stock →GFL Environmental Inc. provides non-hazardous solid waste management services in Canada and the United States.
Utilities · Environmental Services · 15,500 employees
About Perma-Fix Environmental Services
PESI stock →Perma-Fix Environmental Services, Inc., through its subsidiaries, operates as an environmental and technology know-how company in the United States. The company operates in two segments, Treatment and Services.
Industrials · Environmental Services · 293 employees
GFL vs PESI FAQ
Which is bigger, GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value or Perma-Fix Environmental Services?
GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value (GFL) is larger, with a market capitalization of $15.44B compared with $291.96M for Perma-Fix Environmental Services (PESI).
Which stock has performed better over the past year, GFL or PESI?
PESI returned +30.92% over the past 12 months, compared with -5.31% for GFL (price return, excluding dividends). Past performance does not predict future results.
Which pays a higher dividend, GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value or Perma-Fix Environmental Services?
GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value pays a dividend yielding 0.20%, while Perma-Fix Environmental Services does not currently pay a regular dividend.
Are GFL Environmental Subordinate voting shares no par value and Perma-Fix Environmental Services in the same industry?
Yes. Both are classified in the Environmental Services industry within the Utilities sector.