vs
Side-by-side financial comparison of Crane Co (CR) and CASELLA WASTE SYSTEMS INC (CWST). Click either name above to swap in a different company.
Crane Co is the larger business by last-quarter revenue ($696.4M vs $557.2M, roughly 1.2× CASELLA WASTE SYSTEMS INC). Crane Co runs the higher net margin — 9.6% vs -1.0%, a 10.6% gap on every dollar of revenue. On growth, Crane Co posted the faster year-over-year revenue change (24.9% vs 9.6%). CASELLA WASTE SYSTEMS INC produced more free cash flow last quarter ($30.7M vs $-40.2M). Over the past eight quarters, CASELLA WASTE SYSTEMS INC's revenue compounded faster (21.5% CAGR vs 14.8%).
Crane Co. is an American industrial products company based in Stamford, Connecticut. Founded by Richard Teller Crane in 1855, it became one of the leading manufacturers of bathroom fixtures in the United States, until 1990, when that division was sold off. In 1960 it began the process of becoming a holding company with a diverse portfolio. Its business segments are Aerospace & Electronics, Engineered Materials, Fluid Handling, and Controls. Industries served by these segments include chemical...
Casella Waste Systems, Inc. is a waste management company based in Rutland, Vermont, United States. Founded in 1975 with a single truck, Casella is a regional, vertically integrated solid waste services company. Casella provides resource management expertise and services to residential, commercial, municipal and industrial customers, primarily in the areas of solid waste collection and disposal, transfer, recycling and organics services. The company provides integrated solid waste services in...
CR vs CWST — Head-to-Head
Income Statement — Q1 FY2026 vs Q1 FY2026
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue | $696.4M | $557.2M |
| Net Profit | $67.1M | $-5.5M |
| Gross Margin | 40.4% | — |
| Operating Margin | 14.4% | 0.9% |
| Net Margin | 9.6% | -1.0% |
| Revenue YoY | 24.9% | 9.6% |
| Net Profit YoY | -37.3% | -15.2% |
| EPS (diluted) | — | $-0.09 |
Green = leading value per metric. Periods may differ when fiscal calendars don't align.
8-Quarter Revenue & Profit Trend
Side-by-side quarterly history. Quarters aligned by calendar period so offset fiscal years line up.
| Q1 26 | $696.4M | $557.2M | ||
| Q4 25 | $581.0M | $469.1M | ||
| Q3 25 | $589.2M | $485.4M | ||
| Q2 25 | $577.2M | $465.3M | ||
| Q1 25 | $557.6M | $417.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $544.1M | $427.5M | ||
| Q3 24 | $548.3M | $411.6M | ||
| Q2 24 | $528.6M | $377.2M |
| Q1 26 | $67.1M | $-5.5M | ||
| Q4 25 | $81.7M | $-2.5M | ||
| Q3 25 | $91.4M | $10.0M | ||
| Q2 25 | $86.4M | $5.2M | ||
| Q1 25 | $107.1M | $-4.8M | ||
| Q4 24 | $81.0M | $4.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $77.3M | $5.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $71.6M | $7.0M |
| Q1 26 | 40.4% | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 41.6% | 33.3% | ||
| Q3 25 | 42.7% | 35.0% | ||
| Q2 25 | 42.0% | 33.8% | ||
| Q1 25 | 42.6% | 32.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 40.9% | 33.2% | ||
| Q3 24 | 41.4% | 35.1% | ||
| Q2 24 | 40.0% | 35.4% |
| Q1 26 | 14.4% | 0.9% | ||
| Q4 25 | 17.5% | 2.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 20.1% | 6.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 17.8% | 4.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 18.1% | 0.8% | ||
| Q4 24 | 15.8% | 4.3% | ||
| Q3 24 | 18.1% | 5.9% | ||
| Q2 24 | 16.9% | 6.1% |
| Q1 26 | 9.6% | -1.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 14.1% | -0.5% | ||
| Q3 25 | 15.5% | 2.1% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.0% | 1.1% | ||
| Q1 25 | 19.2% | -1.2% | ||
| Q4 24 | 14.9% | 1.1% | ||
| Q3 24 | 14.1% | 1.4% | ||
| Q2 24 | 13.5% | 1.9% |
| Q1 26 | — | $-0.09 | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.40 | $-0.04 | ||
| Q3 25 | $1.56 | $0.16 | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.47 | $0.08 | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.83 | $-0.08 | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.37 | $0.08 | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.33 | $0.10 | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.23 | $0.12 |
Balance Sheet & Financial Strength
Snapshot of each company's liquidity, leverage and book value from the latest quarter.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Cash + ST InvestmentsLiquidity on hand | $355.4M | $126.9M |
| Total DebtLower is stronger | $1.2B | — |
| Stockholders' EquityBook value | $2.1B | $1.6B |
| Total Assets | $4.1B | $3.3B |
| Debt / EquityLower = less leverage | 0.57× | — |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | $355.4M | $126.9M | ||
| Q4 25 | $506.5M | $123.8M | ||
| Q3 25 | $388.2M | $192.7M | ||
| Q2 25 | $332.2M | $217.8M | ||
| Q1 25 | $435.1M | $267.7M | ||
| Q4 24 | $306.7M | $358.3M | ||
| Q3 24 | $258.2M | $519.0M | ||
| Q2 24 | $229.3M | $208.5M |
| Q1 26 | $1.2B | — | ||
| Q4 25 | $1.1B | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q2 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q1 25 | — | $1.1B | ||
| Q4 24 | $247.0M | $1.1B | ||
| Q3 24 | — | $1.0B | ||
| Q2 24 | — | $976.6M |
| Q1 26 | $2.1B | $1.6B | ||
| Q4 25 | $2.1B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.0B | $1.6B | ||
| Q2 25 | $1.9B | $1.6B | ||
| Q1 25 | $1.8B | $1.5B | ||
| Q4 24 | $1.6B | $1.6B | ||
| Q3 24 | $1.6B | $1.5B | ||
| Q2 24 | $1.5B | $1.0B |
| Q1 26 | $4.1B | $3.3B | ||
| Q4 25 | $3.9B | $3.3B | ||
| Q3 25 | $2.5B | $3.3B | ||
| Q2 25 | $2.5B | $3.3B | ||
| Q1 25 | $2.6B | $3.2B | ||
| Q4 24 | $2.6B | $3.2B | ||
| Q3 24 | $2.7B | $3.1B | ||
| Q2 24 | $2.5B | $2.5B |
| Q1 26 | 0.57× | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 0.56× | 0.72× | ||
| Q3 25 | — | 0.72× | ||
| Q2 25 | — | 0.72× | ||
| Q1 25 | — | 0.72× | ||
| Q4 24 | 0.15× | 0.70× | ||
| Q3 24 | — | 0.68× | ||
| Q2 24 | — | 0.94× |
Cash Flow & Capital Efficiency
How much cash each business actually produces after reinvestment. Cash flow is harder to manipulate than net income.
| Metric | | |
|---|---|---|
| Operating Cash FlowLast quarter | — | $62.3M |
| Free Cash FlowOCF − Capex | $-40.2M | $30.7M |
| FCF MarginFCF / Revenue | -5.8% | 5.5% |
| Capex IntensityCapex / Revenue | 1.5% | 9.0% |
| Cash ConversionOCF / Net Profit | — | — |
| TTM Free Cash FlowTrailing 4 quarters | $361.5M | $120.7M |
8-quarter trend — quarters aligned by calendar period.
| Q1 26 | — | $62.3M | ||
| Q4 25 | $205.8M | $96.6M | ||
| Q3 25 | $130.2M | $93.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $105.0M | $89.5M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-46.2M | $50.1M | ||
| Q4 24 | $202.0M | $109.8M | ||
| Q3 24 | $75.4M | $91.8M | ||
| Q2 24 | $51.3M | $72.1M |
| Q1 26 | $-40.2M | $30.7M | ||
| Q4 25 | $196.0M | $39.3M | ||
| Q3 25 | $116.8M | $27.6M | ||
| Q2 25 | $88.9M | $23.1M | ||
| Q1 25 | $-60.4M | $-5.4M | ||
| Q4 24 | $188.2M | $32.9M | ||
| Q3 24 | $67.3M | $40.4M | ||
| Q2 24 | $44.6M | $27.5M |
| Q1 26 | -5.8% | 5.5% | ||
| Q4 25 | 33.7% | 8.4% | ||
| Q3 25 | 19.8% | 5.7% | ||
| Q2 25 | 15.4% | 5.0% | ||
| Q1 25 | -10.8% | -1.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 34.6% | 7.7% | ||
| Q3 24 | 12.3% | 9.8% | ||
| Q2 24 | 8.4% | 7.3% |
| Q1 26 | 1.5% | 9.0% | ||
| Q4 25 | 1.7% | 12.2% | ||
| Q3 25 | 2.3% | 13.6% | ||
| Q2 25 | 2.8% | 14.3% | ||
| Q1 25 | 2.5% | 13.3% | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.5% | 18.0% | ||
| Q3 24 | 1.5% | 12.5% | ||
| Q2 24 | 1.3% | 11.8% |
| Q1 26 | — | — | ||
| Q4 25 | 2.52× | — | ||
| Q3 25 | 1.42× | 9.37× | ||
| Q2 25 | 1.22× | 17.19× | ||
| Q1 25 | -0.43× | — | ||
| Q4 24 | 2.49× | 22.51× | ||
| Q3 24 | 0.98× | 15.91× | ||
| Q2 24 | 0.72× | 10.29× |
Financial Flow Comparison
Revenue → gross profit → operating profit → net profit for each company.
Revenue Breakdown by Segment
CR
| Process Flow Technologies | $378.1M | 54% |
| Aerospace & Advanced Technologies | $318.3M | 46% |
CWST
| Collection | $334.8M | 60% |
| Transfer station | $65.9M | 12% |
| Processing (ii) | $49.0M | 9% |
| Landfill | $48.0M | 9% |
| National Accounts (ii) | $45.6M | 8% |
| Transportation | $8.2M | 1% |
| Landfill gas-to-energy | $2.9M | 1% |
