GFL vs. TRI: GFL Environmental vs. Thomson Reuters Stock Comparison

November 11, 2026

How do GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI) stack up? This page sets them side by side across company profile, performance and risk, profitability, growth, financial strength, dividends, and valuation, with selected fundamentals also measured against each stock's industry-group peers.

Company Profile

GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI) both fall under the Commercial & Professional Services industry group, but GFL is classified in Commercial Services & Supplies while TRI is classified in Professional Services.

Thomson Reuters (TRI) has more than two decades of public-market history since June 12, 2002, whereas GFL Environmental (GFL) listed on March 3, 2020 and has a much shorter record to draw on.

Company profile comparison for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI)
Profile Item	GFL	TRI
Name	GFL Environmental Inc.	Thomson Reuters Corporation
Country/Region	United States	Canada
GICS Sector	Industrials	Industrials
GICS Industry Group	Commercial & Professional Services	Commercial & Professional Services
GICS Industry	Commercial Services & Supplies	Professional Services
GICS Sub-Industry	Environmental & Facilities Services	Research & Consulting Services
Market Capitalization	16.72 billion USD	48.79 billion USD
Currency	USD	USD
Exchange	NYSE	Nasdaq
Listing Date	March 3, 2020	June 12, 2002
Security Type	Common Stock	Common Stock

Price Performance

Cumulative Growth

GFL

TRI

GSPC

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI), with S&P 500 (GSPC) for reference: Growth of a $10,000 investment over the past five years. Adjusted for dividends and splits.

Trailing Returns

Loading price history…

Trailing total returns for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI). Returns over one year are annualized.

Calendar-Year Returns

Loading price history…

Calendar-year total returns for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI). Each bar is that year's total return, measured year-end to year-end.

Performance Metrics

Price performance metrics for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI)
Metric	GFL	TRI
Total Return (1Y)	7.30%	-16.97%
Total Return (3Y, Annualized)	17.51%	-3.77%
Total Return (5Y, Annualized)	3.62%	0.07%

Risk Profile

Drawdown History

GFL

TRI

GSPC

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI), with S&P 500 (GSPC) for reference: Drawdown from the running peak over the past five years. Each line shows the decline from its prior peak; 0% marks a new high.

Return Distribution

Loading price history…

Distribution of monthly total returns for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI). Each bar is the share of months whose return fell in that 5% bucket.

Risk Metrics

Risk profile metrics for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI)
Metric	GFL	TRI
Volatility (1Y, Annualized)	29.80%	52.25%
Beta (5Y)	0.66	0.73
Max Drawdown (5Y)	-42.75%	-62.87%
Avg. Volume (3M)	3.45M	1.62M

Risk-Adjusted Performance

Risk-Return Positioning

GFL and TRI are plotted by 1-year volatility (risk) and 1-year return. The dashed Capital Allocation Line runs from the risk-free rate through the shared industry median.

Risk-Adjusted Metrics

Risk-adjusted metrics for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI)
Metric	GFL	TRI
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)	0.10	-0.41
Sortino Ratio (1Y)	0.15	-0.58

Profitability

ROE (TTM)

GFL Environmental (GFL) reports a negative ROE of -2.97%; negative ROE can reflect losses or negative shareholders’ equity, so it is harder to read as capital efficiency. Meanwhile Thomson Reuters (TRI) reports 14.11%, ranking against industry peers normally.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

-2.97%

Max: 47.06%
Q3: 25.43%
Median: 14.11%
Q1: 3.92%
GFL: -2.97%
Min: -20.15%

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

14.11%

Max: 47.06%
Q3: 25.43%
TRI: 14.11%
Median: 14.11%
Q1: 3.92%
Min: -20.15%

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their ROE against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group benchmark.

Net Margin (TTM)

GFL Environmental (GFL) reports a negative net margin of -4.28%, usually indicating a net loss over the period. Meanwhile Thomson Reuters (TRI) reports 19.69%, ranking against industry peers normally.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

-4.28%

Max: 23.28%
Q3: 11.35%
Median: 5.65%
Q1: 0.87%
GFL: -4.28%
Min: -8.60%

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

19.69%

Max: 23.28%
TRI: 19.69%
Q3: 11.35%
Median: 5.65%
Q1: 0.87%
Min: -8.60%

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their net margin against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group benchmark.

Operating Margin (TTM)

Thomson Reuters (TRI) at 21.93% operates in the top operating margin quartile, ahead of GFL Environmental (GFL) at 9.44%, which runs around its industry’s norm.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

9.44%

Max: 38.50%
Q3: 18.84%
Median: 10.40%
GFL: 9.44%
Q1: 5.59%
Min: -12.00%

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

21.93%

Max: 38.50%
TRI: 21.93%
Q3: 18.84%
Median: 10.40%
Q1: 5.59%
Min: -12.00%

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their operating margin against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group benchmark.

Profitability Metrics

Profitability metrics for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI)
Metric	GFL	TRI
ROE (TTM)	-2.97%	14.11%
ROA (TTM)	1.11%	6.96%
Net Margin (TTM)	-4.28%	19.69%
Operating Margin (TTM)	9.44%	21.93%
Gross Margin (TTM)	19.78%	39.72%

Growth

Revenue Growth

Both GFL Environmental (GFL) at 7.77% and Thomson Reuters (TRI) at 3.00% land near their industries' usual revenue growth ranges, so top-line momentum looks broadly in line with peers on both sides.

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their Revenue Growth across different time periods.

EPS Growth

Only one side can be read here: Thomson Reuters (TRI) reports EPS growth of -31.90%, ranked against its industry; GFL Environmental (GFL) has no EPS growth figure this period.

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their EPS Growth across different time periods.

Growth Metrics

Growth metrics for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI)
Metric	GFL	TRI
Revenue Growth (YoY)	7.77%	3.00%
Revenue Growth (3Y CAGR)	-0.72%	4.10%
EPS Growth (YoY)	--	-31.90%
EPS Growth (3Y CAGR)	--	3.68%

Financial Strength

Current Ratio (MRQ)

Both GFL Environmental (GFL) at 0.93 and Thomson Reuters (TRI) at 1.08 run current ratio in the tighter-liquidity quartile of industry peers, leaving thinner cushions against current liabilities than typical competitors.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

0.93

Max: 3.63
Q3: 2.14
Median: 1.55
Q1: 1.09
GFL: 0.93
Min: 0.45

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

1.08

Max: 3.63
Q3: 2.14
Median: 1.55
Q1: 1.09
TRI: 1.08
Min: 0.45

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their current ratio against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group benchmark.

Debt / Equity (MRQ)

Both GFL Environmental (GFL) at 1.04 and Thomson Reuters (TRI) at 0.36 fund their balance sheets with roughly industry-typical debt-to-equity mixes.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

1.04

Max: 2.37
Q3: 1.25
GFL: 1.04
Median: 0.88
Q1: 0.35
Min: 0.00

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

0.36

Max: 2.37
Q3: 1.25
Median: 0.88
TRI: 0.36
Q1: 0.35
Min: 0.00

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their debt-to-equity ratio against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group benchmark.

Financial Strength Metrics

Financial strength metrics for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI)
Metric	GFL	TRI
Current Ratio (MRQ)	0.93	1.08
Debt / Equity (MRQ)	1.04	0.36
Net Debt / EBITDA	6.75	1.17

Dividends

Dividend Yield (TTM)

Thomson Reuters (TRI) at 2.18% delivers top-quartile income for its industry, while GFL Environmental (GFL) at 0.14% pays a more typical yield — both are credible income propositions, TRI the richer one.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

0.14%

Max: 4.33%
Q3: 1.80%
Median: 0.60%
GFL: 0.14%
Q1: 0.00%
Min: 0.00%

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

2.18%

Max: 4.33%
TRI: 2.18%
Q3: 1.80%
Median: 0.60%
Q1: 0.00%
Min: 0.00%

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their dividend yield against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group benchmark.

Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)

GFL Environmental (GFL) at 19.07% pays out a band-typical share of earnings, while Thomson Reuters (TRI) at 79.09% distributes more than its industry norm — less retained, thinner cover.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

19.07%

Max: 99.58%
Q3: 41.99%
GFL: 19.07%
Median: 17.27%
Q1: 0.00%
Min: -17.94%

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

79.09%

Max: 99.58%
TRI: 79.09%
Q3: 41.99%
Median: 17.27%
Q1: 0.00%
Min: -17.94%

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their payout ratio against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group benchmark.

Dividend Metrics

Dividend metrics for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI)
Metric	GFL	TRI
Dividend Yield (TTM)	0.14%	2.18%
Dividend Payout Ratio (TTM)	19.07%	79.09%

Valuation

P/E Ratio (TTM)

An earnings multiple is available for just one side: Thomson Reuters (TRI) trades at 34.53 times trailing earnings, ranked against its peers, while GFL Environmental (GFL) has no P/E ratio this period.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

Max: 49.47
Q3: 33.76
Median: 24.16
Q1: 16.01
Min: 1.89
GFL: --

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

34.53

Max: 49.47
TRI: 34.53
Q3: 33.76
Median: 24.16
Q1: 16.01
Min: 1.89

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): GFL does not report P/E ratio, so it has no value marker; TRI is benchmarked against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group.

P/S Ratio (TTM)

GFL Environmental (GFL) at 2.25 is priced about in line with its industry on P/S ratio, while Thomson Reuters (TRI) at 6.09 sits in the pricier quartile — TRI costs more per dollar of sales.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

2.25

Max: 7.17
Q3: 3.35
GFL: 2.25
Median: 1.33
Q1: 0.69
Min: 0.11

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

6.09

Max: 7.17
TRI: 6.09
Q3: 3.35
Median: 1.33
Q1: 0.69
Min: 0.11

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their P/S ratio against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group benchmark.

P/B Ratio (MRQ)

On P/B ratio, both GFL Environmental (GFL) at 2.42 and Thomson Reuters (TRI) at 4.35 are valued close to their industries’ norm against book — neither stands out from peers.

GFL

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

2.42

Max: 11.25
Q3: 6.08
Median: 2.92
GFL: 2.42
Q1: 1.55
Min: -2.78

TRI

Commercial & Professional Services industry group

4.35

Max: 11.25
Q3: 6.08
TRI: 4.35
Median: 2.92
Q1: 1.55
Min: -2.78

GFL Environmental (GFL) vs. Thomson Reuters (TRI): A comparison of their P/B ratio against the Commercial & Professional Services industry group benchmark.

Valuation Metrics

Valuation metrics for GFL Environmental (GFL) and Thomson Reuters (TRI)
Metric	GFL	TRI
P/E Ratio (TTM)	--	34.53
P/S Ratio (TTM)	2.25	6.09
P/B Ratio (MRQ)	2.42	4.35
Free Cash Flow Yield (TTM)	1.55%	2.27%