Compare price, profitability, solvency, and SEC-reported financials side by side—before deciding which assumptions deserve a closer look.
Decision snapshot: ACA stock price vs GFL: inconclusive Relative valuation is incomplete for this pair. Review the available filing metrics before drawing a conclusion.
Quick read
Each company valued on the other's multiple, then compared with the market price.
Implied fair value · at GFL's multiple
Needs GFL P/E.
Implied fair value · at ACA's multiple
Needs ACA P/E.
Live quote
Price unavailable
Metric by metric
Where each company leads, and how wide the gap is.
Growth edge
Pricing power
Operating leverage
Lower is better
Not comparable
Lower leverage
Statements
Core statements aligned to each company's latest fiscal year.
SEC periods: ACA FY 2025 (ended Dec 31, 2025) · GFL FY 2025 (ended Dec 31, 2025).
Trendline
Five fiscal years of revenue, earnings, and margins before underwriting a re-rating.
Price framework
Market cap plus debt, less cash.
Price framework
Discounted free cash flow, then bridged to a per-share price. Same assumptions applied to both companies.
Arcosa, Inc. · implied price per share
Bear
$20.40
Base
$24.00
Bull
$27.60
GFL Environmental Inc. · implied price per share
Bear
$64.47
Base
$75.84
Bull
$87.22
Balance sheet health
Financial health checks to separate durable balance sheets from potential value traps.
Financial strength on a 0–9 scale.
Bankruptcy-risk signal from balance sheet and earnings power.
Not enough data to score either balance sheet.
Debt / equity
Total debt against shareholders' equity
0.58x
—
Net debt / EBITDA
Leverage against operating earnings
3.28x
2.40x
Cash and equivalents
Liquid reserves on the balance sheet
$214.60M
$85.60M
Total debt
Interest-bearing obligations outstanding
$1.52B
Comparable set
Where the pair sits against the wider comparable set.
Keep comparing
Open adjacent comparisons from the same industry to pressure-test the read across multiple pairs.
$10.33B
Live quote
LLM-powered synthesis
An on-demand narrative read of the same deterministic data.
Based on an earlier data snapshot. Review the filing dates below or refresh after signing in.
If you believe ACA’s stronger growth, margin profile, and quality scores deserve a material premium to GFL, then avoid using GFL P/E alone to justify the stock because the model implies severe downside and the DCF range is far below the current price.
ACA trades at a large apparent premium to GFL-derived implied price, with the model indicating 83.5% downside from the current price. The gap is driven by ACA’s much higher P/E and EV/EBITDA versus GFL, even though ACA has stronger revenue growth and better margins.
Supporting Metrics
